Talk: Episode Guide/Archive 1

• Main
• Archive 1

Archived This talk page was archived. If you wish to add a comment, open a new discussion on the active talk page.

Layout

Due to the fact that the Wikipedia's One Piece Episode List is receiving a major overhaul, and there are several people who liked the original layout and found it helpful, I've decided to move the format over here. Please feel free to make comments and suggestions about the layout on here! I'm also in the process of restoring some of the old information (e.g. placement of movies and specials), along with adding another page for Funimation episode titles. If you'd like to start the Funimation list, feel free to do so! (It's in the link from the top Navigation box, to "English Dub Episode Titles") I hope this new format is helpful to you guys. -- NorseFTX 15:39, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

I've noticed that the tables don't display properly when viewing from Internet Explorer 6; I haven't tested IE7 yet, but I'll try making a few changes to the templates to see if I can fix this. -- NorseFTX 96.251.19.138 14:15, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Ah! After testing it on Internet Explorer 7, the borders do seem to work fine. On that note, I think I'll just leave it the way it is right now. To fix the borders for IE6, several cumbersome edits have to be made that may increase the size (in KB) of the page, so I'll leave it as is. -- NorseFTX 15:17, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Mhm, I also prefer the original layout than the new format on Wikipedia. I think this format is much more convenient and easier to read through than the new layout there. I also like how you placed the movies in the corresponding part of the anime, that way people new to One Piece can watch out for spoilers and such...

How about making a different color or notation for filler or half filler, without having to spoil oneself on episodes? There are some episodes (like 61) that are half filler, but one wouldn't know that unless they clicked the plus sign. Similarly, there are fillers in the middle of some arcs like Arabasta and post-Enies Lobby that one might want to skip without having to click to open the episode description.

Thank you so much for putting this here. The guys at Wikipedia are complete nazi douchebags.

Since when are they Nazi? I agree that they're douchebags but.. Anyway, thanks for putting this here and keeping it up to date.

They're nazi's because they won't even allow a link to this page. They claim it adds nothing to their article! They don't have story Arcs but they think that's "Fancruft" They don't tell you what episodes were made up by the anime (fancruft), they don't tell you when the episodes aired originally, or anything this page does with the movies and specials. All most of us on Wikipedia want is a fucking link to this page or one like it. Ergo, Nazis.

Nazi is a bit strong of a word, but they definitely are a bit overly up-tight about how the regulations and the "Manual of Style" thing works at wiki. I think they really do mean best, but by strictly following the rules, they end up doing more harm than help. They are following the rules, though, so it's not like they're "wrong". I was just worried that we'd lose the old version, we'd be left out in the cold without access to the better format for the sake of their "rules", so I brought it over here. I'm glad you guys are finding it useful! It makes the hours it took to learn about templates worth it. =P -- NorseFTX 01:30, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Why are the movies placed where they are? It's not when they aired, movie 2 aired a month after the entry below it. It's also not where they slot into continuity, because movie 2 is posted in the middle of the Gunkan Island arc, but doesn't have Apis or Ryuuji in it. What is the meaning of having movie 2 posted between episodes 56 and 57 and, I assume, the placement of the other movies?

filler arc's

I think that filler arc's should be treated better.what I mean is,filler battles are still battles,filler charecters are still charecters,and 3 of most importantly,filler arc's are still arc's.67.87.235.185 01:29, 6 January 2009 (UTC)luffymonkey

They are called Filler Arcs for a reason. They have nothing to do with the story. They are non-canon. Meaning that the stories do not appear in the manga and should not be considered part of the true story of One Piece.

Filler tells you how we treat them. They carry a different amount of weight to actaul storyline. One-Winged Hawk 13:20, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Format

Does anyone know what the heck is going on with the format lately? I've tried several times to update the episode summaries for the most recent episode, but all it does is mess up the table. This has never happened before, and I have no clue how to fix it.

130.64.34.228 13:26, 7 August 2009 (UTC) Crossword

About the episode pages themselves...

Why are the short blurbs about the episode statistics called "statics"? It isn't a real word, it seems to be a mistake spelling of statistics, and the word static means "not moving." Is it okay if I change that to "statistics"? --Spandass 16:30, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Oz to Oars

Oz have been changed to Oars in their respective pages, but there are episodes with "Oz" in the name, should it be changed? Zororonoa

Straw Hat Separation Side Story

Why is this being merged into the Amazon Lily arc? I mean, the Straw Hat's Separation Serial WAS a Manga Title Page Arc, just like the Buggy and Coby Side Stories. It even says on the page, "Straw Hat's Separation Serial are the series of cover pages that tells what happened to the other eight Straw Hat Pirates after the crew was sent away on the Saboady Archipelago by Kuma." Note the key phrase, "series of cover pages." Sure, the Buggy and Coby side-stories were only 2 episodes, and the Separation Arc is 4, but that doesn't change its origins, now does it? LazerWulf 08:50, November 7, 2009 (UTC)

Those anime episodes don't show the cover stories, they only show the pages that covered them before Luffy arrived in Impel Down. For the Straw Hat Separation Side Story to be listed, there have to be anime episodes that cover the cover stories.

1. An episode showing Sanji being captured and converted by the Okamas.
2. An episode showing Robin escaping and being rescued by the revolutionaries.
3. An episode showing Franky discovering Vegapunk's house.
4. An episode showing Usopp becoming fat.
5. An episode showing Chopper running away from the natives.
6. An episode showing Nami witnessing Weatheria science.
7. An episode showing the cultists showing their underwear while Brook writes a song instead.
8. An episode showing Zoro and Perona exploring.

There doesn't necessarily have to be 8 episodes. Some of them can be combined. The point however is that there has to be episodes showing these content. Mugiwara Franky 09:13, November 7, 2009 (UTC)

Okay, but I still don't get why they have to be merged into the Amazon Lily arc, since these episodes are just as distinct from that arc as the Buggy and Coby episodes were. And by "the pages that covered them before Luffy arrived in Impel Down" do you mean that they only cover the events that happened before Impel Down? Since the Separation Serial covers events that "all take place during Luffy's 3 arcs; the Amazon Lily arc, Impel Down arc and Marineford arc," and the anime is just now getting to Impel Down, isn't it possible that there will be more episodes later that cover the events you listed, since, technically, those events haven't happened yet (by the anime timeline)? I still think these episodes should be given their own section, since they do cover at least part of the Separation Serial, but maybe it should be qualified with a "Part 1" or something. LazerWulf 10:07, November 7, 2009 (UTC)

The Separation Serial refers to the Straw Hat cover stories. The flashbacks that are shown of the Straw Hats before Luffy enters Impel Down aren't exactly part of the serial as they are not cover stories. They are in a way mini events that happened during Luffy's time in Amazon Lily. In the manga, they are a few panels depicting where the rest of the crew landed. In the anime, they were slightly elongated mostly by filler content. Lengthwise, both manga and anime depictions are relatively short.

There however may be a possibility of the cover stories being depicted in the anime. If the anime does, those episodes that cover content found in the cover stories would be justifiably called the Straw Hat Seperation story or something along those lines. Mugiwara Franky 10:22, November 7, 2009 (UTC)

I still think these episodes should be separated from the Amazon Lily Arc, though. Could you justify labeling them as the "Nakama's Whereabouts Side Story (Filler)"? Since it technically is a side story, and not part of the Amazon Lily arc, and it's "mostly filler". LazerWulf 10:39, November 7, 2009 (UTC)

While they're a side story per say, they aren't a side story like Coby's or Buggy's. Calling them a side story alongside with Coby's and Buggy's will only confuse people into thinking that they're the Straw Hat cover stories. Also while the episodes are elongated with filler, they aren't exactly filler. Parts of the episodes are filler but the general idea portrayed within them is canon.Mugiwara Franky 10:56, November 7, 2009 (UTC)

I can see where the confusion might come from, and I guess it doesn't help matters that the Separation Serial page says "These arcs are also featured in and expanded upon in the One Piece anime." (That line might need some clarification, if I do say so myself.) However, I still stand by my original assertion that these episodes should be grouped separately from the Amazon Lily arc.

I'll admit that these episodes are hard to qualify. They're not Side Stories exactly like Buggy's and Coby's, but I don't think they deserve to be called their own Arc (though I believe they had been called an Arc in an earlier version of this page). They're not precisely filler, but their source isn't completely from the manga, either (like some of the Davy Back Fight episodes). Maybe call it the "Nakama's Whereabouts Interlude"? But, still, it needs to be called something. LazerWulf 13:02, November 7, 2009 (UTC)

I see where your confusion comes from. That line in the separation serial was apparently a mistake created when the episodes were slated to appear. Many people speculated back then that the episodes would also cover the cover stories. This is also kinda the reason why they were given a separate division in this page.

These events in the manga were kinda a small footnote placed at the end of the Amazon Lily arc. While the anime elongates them like it does with manga content from time to time, they're still a small footnote. Their episode titles kinda separate them enough. However in a big table that divides every episode per saga and arc, they kinda don't warrant a division.Mugiwara Franky 13:21, November 7, 2009 (UTC)

Two proposals

1.I think it's neccesary to denote the OVAs with a different color then the TV specials since they were not aired at all. 2.What about coloring the filler episodes with a distinct color? El Chupacabra 12:36, December 12, 2009 (UTC)

1. There's actually only one OVA per say so a different color for one entry maybe a question mark.
2. That's abit of a question, some episodes are mostly filler while others consist of both filler and canon.

Mugiwara Franky 14:03, December 12, 2009 (UTC)

The OVA was made by a different animation studio then the rest of the anime. In my opinion it has even more in common with the movies then with the TV specials since it was not shown on TV. However, I think we can't throw it in one pot with the specials or with the movies, and therefore it requires an own color. El Chupacabra 12:03, December 14, 2009 (UTC)

4Kids and Funimation

Should we copy the "Episode List" section form the 4Kids Entertainment article and the "DVD and Blu-Ray Releases" section from the FUNimation Entertainment article into this article? I think it would be very good. El Chupacabra 16:19, January 30, 2010 (UTC)

I think it's getting rather big already without the addition of English dub episode titles in it. 4kids is over but with the way that Funi is going, they're most likely going to do the entire series. So that's going to be three long lists of almost identical content. Considering that there is a possibility that Funi would drop the series and another company would pick up the series from the start, that's going to make problems a bit more hectic.

The page probably should just note down the Japanese Episodes and not the dubs just so not to strain it too much.Mugiwara Franky 16:29, January 30, 2010 (UTC)

I think they should be copied in order to present the alternate names and in case of Funimation, the division into seasons, so the lists will be not identicla. El Chupacabra 15:15, February 1, 2010 (UTC)

While the names will not be identical, that does not change the fact that the lists will be identical in content. It would kinda be like having two lists of fruits in two or more different languages. One list of fruits would be named in English. The second list would be named in German. The third and so on would be named in other conceivable languages. A bit really redundant. The name is different but the meaning is the same. It kinda thus would be easier to just have the lists in separate pages as content would at least not be redundant in a single place.

Besides this, aren't the respective pages of the dub lists working for them in listing down the episodes. While this is clearly copying, it sounds to an extent almost like a proposal to merge all the lists together. I mean if a person can get the information in one place, why bother looking another place that has less.

This is kinda like with case with the chapters and volumes. Having another list of chapters arranged in a different way seemed rather redundant when you can find the same the information in the first list. The only difference was the arrangement to an extent. If you combine the three episode lists together, you make the other lists redundant. Why would people look in a page that just lists down the episode titles of Funi when they can look at a bigger page that lists down both the Japanese and Funi titles. The bigger page would provide more info and the other one would be lacking.Mugiwara Franky 16:00, February 1, 2010 (UTC)

Well, these three lists are only partially identical. The one on this page gives the translation of the original name, the japanese airing date and a quick overview. It groups the episodes by arcs. The 4Kids list gives the American airing dates and shows which episodes were combined. The Funimation list arranges the episodes by DVD which are grouped by Season and Voyage. It also shows who commented which episode. And it has images, that's something this article lacks. If you think that it will make the other redundant, we can move them completely to this page, andnot just copy them. Some people complained that the articles on 4Kids and Funimation are too long. The Funimation episode list was originaly a separate article (and actually it still exists because I promised Drunk Samurai not to nominate it for deletion without his agreement). El Chupacabra 17:02, February 1, 2010 (UTC)

For images, not every article needs to have them. Images are nice but if they are used just for decorational purposes then they are abit useless. You can have a good page that has no images at all and you can have a bad page that is nothing but images as well.

Considering that there have been complaints on 4kids and Funi's pages on how long they are, merging their lists here would just make a bigger problem. Taking large amounts of info from two pages and merging them together with a third page with huge if not bigger amount of info does not solve anything.

Putting the 4kids and Funi lists is a proposal made in good faith but it really only puts weight on an already heavy list.Mugiwara Franky 17:55, February 1, 2010 (UTC)

If you want images, seasons and pieces then divide the list according to Japanese DVDs seasons. Which are different from Funimation and that is one problem that you on purpose ignore. Tipota 18:04, February 1, 2010 (UTC)

So in other words, apart from the already large list arranged by arcs and sagas that notes down the air date and japanese names for episodes, the large list of 4kids that has their own names and episode numbering, the large list of Funimation that not lists their dubbed episodes by DVDs but also contains image, the large list of the Funimation simulcast episodes (in case people forgot), we have to also put in a list that arranges the Japanese episodes via the Japanese DVD seasons and their images as well. That's starting to sound way too much for this page to handle even if it was all organized in a clever way. And that's only taking in account for the episodes we have. If One Piece has at least double the amount of episodes in the future, then the page is going to be too much to handle.Mugiwara Franky 18:24, February 1, 2010 (UTC)

I would like to add both the Japanese and the Funi episodes, in order to have a page where reades can compare the two differnt divisions, somthing that does not exist. And the page will NOT become too long. It is currently 229,514 bytes long. The article on FUNimation Entertainment has 37,959 bytes and 4Kids Entertainment is 22,896 bytes long. I want to copy parts of these articles, not the entire pages. I think that after the merger this page will stay at the second place in the ranking, behind Monkey D. Luffy (294,142 bytes). Of course the list will grow with the progression of the anime, but the other articles on characters, organisations etc. will grow as well. You had similar concerns about the merger of the List of Chapters into the Chapters and Volumes article, but as you can see it didn't "boost" the page. El Chupacabra 16:37, February 2, 2010 (UTC)

For the List of Chapters, you provided an alternative per say. Not the entire page just the main points. For this one, the parts of the articles you are asking for however are very long and are arranged differently. The 4kids arrangement is wonky for starters. The Funi arrangement, while more complete to the Japanese, is arranged differently via seasons.

Maybe because I can't see how you're gonna solve the problem so that all the necessary content would fit, but all I'm thinking of what the plan might be is dumping differently arranged huge lists and other content into a page that's already oversaturated. For comparing the different names, maybe tweaking how the article is arranged could work at least for Funi to an extent. It however couldn't work for the 4kids titles. After a certain point, their list is no longer compatible to that of the original Japanese.Mugiwara Franky 17:09, February 2, 2010 (UTC)

OK, I'll try to explain what I intend.

1. The Funimation name should be added to the episode sections behind the Japanese name.

2. The 4Kids episode list should be copied without alterations in order to show their arrange and episode names.

3. A new section should be created for the Japanese and Funimation DVD releases. If the Funimation names will be included in the episode boxes, then the voyage boxes will not double the names but look exactly like the boxes in the "Chapters by Saga and Arc" section of Chapters and Volumes, saying just "Episodes X to Y". If you think that adding the Funi names into the episode boxes will make the article too complicated I will just copy the entire "DVD releases" section form Funimation.

Do you understand my plan now? El Chupacabra 13:00, February 3, 2010 (UTC)

You just want to create a big redundant list with multiply translation per episode you probably forgot that Funimation will change the episode title for edited end simulcast episodes; (Current status) 116+ episode with 3 different translations and 4 release dates this is redundant and confusing. Can you give me one good reason why not to include the 4Kids title on the main episode list? A copy of 4kids list here makes the 4Kids page totally unless, and the list (4kids) can provide a good explanation about episode order without copied here; I already link to Japanese episodes. Also can you provide a visual example how you divide DVD seasons/arc. not to remind you the page size. Tipota 14:19, February 3, 2010 (UTC)

For El Chupacabra

1. The Funi names can be worked in as said since Funi's pretty much aligned properly with the Japanese version. It might look out of place in some places though. There's also the matter with the Funi dub and simulcast names. While Funi's backing up the simulcast, there may might be a slight chance that the titles of the episodes when dubbed could be changed. These problems however maybe ironed out for the moment.
2. The 4kids list may put stress on the page really especially due to the wonky numbering as stated. It's also kinda why it wasn't included here in the first place as stated in the top of this page.
3. The Funi and Japanese DVD releases may require a different page altogether to an extent as there might be problems. Unlike with the Volumes in the Chapters and Volumes page, the DVD's of both Funi and the Japanese I think maybe completely arranged differently. A DVD from Japan may contain more or less episodes than that of Funi's. There's also the case of how many DVD's they have altogether. Japan certainly has more DVD's currently, however when Funi's gotten to a point that's significant, the number of DVD's in both versions maybe just as wonky as those of 4kids.

In relation to all 3, I kinda have to point out that the page was and is currently designed to accommodate just a single large list of episodes. It's design could be altered I guess, however it maybe putting too much especially considering some of the additions proposed.Mugiwara Franky 14:27, February 3, 2010 (UTC)

For Tipota

I think you have some points there. The most convincing is a little realization. I didn't exactly thought about it before but Funi really does have more than 1 set for it's dub names. There's the edited TV version names which follow 4kids standards and there's the unedited DVD version names.Mugiwara Franky 14:32, February 3, 2010 (UTC)

There's also 4kids explanation as you pointed out Tipota. Copying just the list of episodes, would be kinda confusing to some without the explanation. A person who sees the list without an explanation will wonder to an extent such as why an episode like Episode 50 Avalanche! exists in the first place.Mugiwara Franky 14:37, February 3, 2010 (UTC)

• JP DVDs: 2 (rarely), 4 (rarely) or 3 episodes per DVD(pieces).
• Episode 116: Japanese season 4th; Funimation 2nd.
• Also the Japanese version divides some seasons into two parts. (Arabasta , Skypiea)Tipota 14:44, February 3, 2010 (UTC)

Well, I think this page should be similar to the Chapters and Volumes page and show both the division of episodes by Sagy/Arc and their division by Seasons/DVD volumes. This section will look similar to the "DVD and Blu-Ray Releases" section of FUNimation Entertainment. However, if the Funi uncut episode titles will be added into the boxes, it will not show the complete list but just the range of the episodes. The Japanese DVDs will be arranged in the same way, according to their division. This will be two lists, forming two sub-sections. There will be Section:Japanese DVD releases and Section:Funimation DVD releases. The reason not to include the 4Kids title into the main list is their way of creating episodes out of many japanese ones. That's the reason why I want to copy their list as a new section. It will show the names used by 4Kids and the Funi edited version. Only the name of the uncut Funi episede should appear in the episode box.El Chupacabra 14:50, February 3, 2010 (UTC)

The DVD division sounds nice but it really sounds more for another page. The 4kids list kinda does need some bit of explanation. Simply writing a list without an explanation gives some question marks. Also considering you're adding the Funimation edited names as well in the same section, it might really be a bit too much.

For just showing the uncut Funi Episode title, it kinda makes the list abit lacking in a certain way. Alongside the reason as providing a page that shows the name differences of the various episodes, another person may theoretically opt for providing a page that shows the different air dates between the different dubs. There's also the case that another person would want to place the other Funi episode titles in the mix as well since it allows users to be able to differentiate all the titles more easily.

Looking at the proposal it kinda deviates the main purpose of this page abit. It's main purpose is to list down the episodes that come out from Japan. Giving it an option such as allowing people to differentiate the different names of the various dubs is a nice addition, however it best works if all the names are properly arranged in the same manner. The 4kids problem kinda relates to this. Forcing people abit to compare a 4kids name to what the original name of an episode was by going up and down in vastly different lists is abit non-user friendly.Mugiwara Franky 15:11, February 3, 2010 (UTC)

If you think that the main purpose of this article is merely to list down all all episodes, then it is already deviated, beacuse this page already has some additional information, e.g. the air date or a brief summary for each episede. And it does group episodes by Saga/arc. However, the division of Episodes into Seasons/Volumes doesn't obey this division. Therefore it would be good to give it as a section. It would be somehow similar to the Chapters and Volumes page which has a list of all chapters by volumes and a table showing the division of chapters in Sagas and Arcs. However, I don't think that a separate page for the DVD releases would be better then a section in this article. Why do you fear big size? Is a article of 270,000 bytes automatically worse then one of 229,514 bytes? El Chupacabra 15:27, February 3, 2010 (UTC)

For the air dates and the summaries, they kinda cooperate well with the given list and how it is arranged. They both relate to the same list and can be added without much hassle especially. It's not like one episode of one single dub has several different airdates and summaries.

For the Saga and Arc divisions, they are there in order to help navigate the various different episodes. If they were not there, they just have one big list that people would have trouble with. A list of anything technically needs at least one easily arrangeable form of divisioning to get the main point across.

For the episodes in entirety, their page kinda can't be arranged in the same way the Chapters and Volumes page was handled. One is a list of that has been constant in arrangement in all versions to allow additions. The other however is so jabbled up in all the different version with different arrangements, titles, episode numbers, and etc. that all of it can't be fit in one single page properly and fairly.

For the DVD's, a page would not be big or any different from a section in this page indeed. It however allows a less constricted user friendly environment for not only the list to be properly maintained but also for the subject to be expanded upon. I mean for the Japanese DVD's at least, some people would want to write about them.

In regards to big size, it's kinda how you look how a page would expand. For character pages, sections could be summarized. The size of a character page can thus vary depending on how it's handled. For constant lists like an episode list on the other hand, everything kinda needs to be noted as it is a list. You can't take out sections in a list as it will only creates blanks. In other words a list will only become bigger and bigger.Mugiwara Franky 15:53, February 3, 2010 (UTC)

The Funi uncut names will cooperate with the given list as well. It would be just one more line in each box. I have an idea how to fit it properly into the page. I tried to explain this. There will be two fixed lists: One for the Japanese DVDs by Japanese seasons and one for Funi DVDs Funi seasons. Each list would grow with the release of new DVDs. However, other lists will grow as well, for example Mythbusters. In the eyes of a reader, they have a simialr length. And Character articles will grow as well. A good article on a major character will be quite long, and grow with the progression of the story. Othrewise it becomes a stub. El Chupacabra 16:22, February 3, 2010 (UTC)

The more different sections and parts you put in a list, the more they would demand if they are lacking in some areas. One is like what is pointed out by Tipota. If you put the 4kids list in, it would demand some explanation. I've seen the list and the explanations above really help boost it. Another is the episode names, simply putting the Funi uncut names is lacking especially if the purpose is to differentiate tittles. The simulcast episodes would require to be let in as well as they are part of Funi's choice of titles in a sense. The DVD section also in fact requires more if implemented. Apart from Funi and Japanese DVD's, 4kids apparently also has DVD's as well.

For Mythbusters, it is a different matter. The list grows but does not deviate too much in it's basic sections and arrangement. It gives at least one types of division that divides the various myths based on content and misconception. It does not give another type saying that the various myths can be arranged in another way.Mugiwara Franky 16:41, February 3, 2010 (UTC)

But that's the point. Episodes can be arranged by Arcs as in this list, by Japanese seasons or by Funi seasons. We already divide them by Japanese seasons, see Category:Seasons. I think this page should present all the three possible divisions. However, the divisions by seasons and the list of 4Kids episodes would be just supplimentary, the only change to the existing part would be the addition of Funi titles. El Chupacabra 16:56, February 3, 2010 (UTC)

"Only the name of the uncut Funi episode should appear in the episode box." You are kidding right? Why you banned simulcast and edited? It is obviously that your Personal Opinion is different than mine and eventually you turn back to your original idea to copy-paste 4Kids and Funi lists here. If you do that you need to copy the entire page to provide an explanation to readers.

Some additional problems:

1. Japanese seasons do not include any Special episode; you need new lists for specials, movies and OVA’s. The current Chronological Order will be ruined
2. Japanese DVDs(Feb 3, 2010) are 84 behind the anime and will be 85 next month; they release 3 episodes per month instead of 4 episodes. You understand that the list with no season division will grow up.
3. Big size = Browser Delay/Crush/Freeze Tipota 17:05, February 3, 2010 (UTC)

For El

The list can indeed be arranged by three different but that doesn't mean you have to include every type of division in dividing stuff. The division of the episodes in this page was made in order to better find the different episodes. You slightly don't need a small section that tells people how to divide the whole page in another way. It's abit redundant as it serves somewhat no purpose.

We do indeed divide the episodes by seasons in a category. But that doesn't mean we should list down this type of division just because it is there in a page that is saturated by a more prominent way of dividing. Besides based on this category:Anime Art Directors, we can divide the episodes by Anime Art directors too. If you want to show a page that shows the various different ways you can divide a list, this has to go in as well.

The Funi titles are what you are really after in the long run. They can't stand without the other names as without them it is not a list that shows difference in name titles. Maybe a different page altogether that just shows the difference in names altogether would be best as such a list can't be easily incorporated in this one.Mugiwara Franky 17:22, February 3, 2010 (UTC)

The division by animation directors is less suitable for a list because the episodes made by the same director do not follow each other. However, the names of the director can be included into the episode box. If you think that incorporating the Funi names into the boxes would be too difficult, we should just copy the boxes from the Funimation article. There are some reasons to add the DVD lists. 1. there are people who whatch One Piece on DVD. 2. The OVA were releasd only at DVD. 3. This wikia lacks a list of japanese DVDs by seasons. 4. This article is the best place for this list. El Chupacabra 15:04, February 4, 2010 (UTC)

Copying the entire box and list sections of Funi dub, 4kids, or any other dub (the Odex one in case people forgot) is a serious load addition. It would seriously put too much on a page that is already heavily loaded and is expected to become more as the anime goes on. I mean have you actually given a real good thought on how the page will be with all these proposals. Will it be user friendly as in helping users navigate? Will be useful additions or will it be redundant? Will it be really be worth the extra downloading time. It's really asking too much just for the sake wanting a page that shows the difference of episode names across the various Japanese and English dubs. Merging stuff together can be good but it can't work if it is too constrained.

For the DVDs, since we really do need such a list, the best course of action based on the situation of this page is to really make a new article called List of DVDs. It's not that farfetched of an article. What is wrong with having it as a separate article? Is it because it be a stubby looking page? Is it because people might not find it? Is it because such a page would lack other things like Japanese airdates for the episodes? A list that shows the DVD's, most specifically the Japanese, would be a welcome addition. However it would not be of any use, if people can't find it or even expand it if it is in a small section of a very crowded page.Mugiwara Franky 16:42, February 4, 2010 (UTC)

Well, if you all think that a separate aricle for DVDs would be better let's try it. However, the question on 4Kids episodes is not solved. It's not about DVDs but about a slightly different arrange of episodes. I still think that it would be useful to add this list to this page. It's really not big. El Chupacabra 16:51, February 9, 2010 (UTC)

Official Japanese Seasons

Is there any way this episode list can be edited to include the official Japanese Season Designations? I'm not talking about a complete overhaul, just instead of "The East Blue Saga" Make it

"Season One: The East Blue Saga"

"Seasons 2-4: The Baroque Works Saga" and then put the spots where Seasons 2, 3, and 4 begin. (2 on Reverse Mountain, 3 on Drum, 4 on Alabasta)

"Seasons 5-6: The Skypiea Saga" (5 is all the Filler, 6 is Jaya and Skypiea)

"Seasons 7-9: The CP9 Saga" (7 is G8 and the DBF, 8 is W7, 9 is Enies Lobby and Ice Hunter. Yes, Toei considers both G8 and Ice Hunters as part of CP9)

"Seasons 10-Present: The Whitebeard War Saga (10 is Thriller Bark, 11 is Sabaody, 12 is Amazon Lilly, and 13 is Impel Down.)

All of this comes from the "One Piece-Pia" guidebook. I just think it would be a nice addition. The list could stay exactly the same as it is right now, you'd just have to change the header information for each of these Sagas/Arcs. I'll do it if you'll let me.DemonRin 07:19, February 7, 2010 (UTC)

Hello? Can someone comment? DemonRin 09:16, February 9, 2010 (UTC)

According to this page there are 120 DVDs. It was said above that each has 2 to 4 Episodes, but which episode is on which disc? We need to find it out before we create the article. El Chupacabra 16:51, February 9, 2010 (UTC)

I have already added that information on episode pages Tipota 17:05, February 9, 2010 (UTC)

Thank you. El Chupacabra 17:11, February 9, 2010 (UTC)

Goat Island/Rainbow Mist

Are they considered part of the Baroque Works or Skypeia Saga? The Pope 05:31, April 9, 2010 (UTC)

I would put them into the Skypeia Saga because Robin is now a strawhat and not an antagonist. Besides, if we include them inot the Baroque works saga, it has 10 arcs andSkypeia has only 3. Putting them into the skypeia saga would make the sagas more equal. El Chupacabra 16:01, April 9, 2010 (UTC)

They normally get counted as a seperate arc of their own, as do many fillers. they don't usually count towards anything in the eyes of many fans so I kinda guess they don't really belong here too. But if I had to, I'd actually divide them in two with the first half belonging to the Alabasta and the latter Skypiea. One-Winged Hawk 16:05, April 9, 2010 (UTC)

For the filler, in terms of saga, I would probably place it in Skypiea rather than Baroque Works. For the Baroque Works Saga, it kinda truly ended after the Straw Hats left Arabasta with Baroque Works defeated and all. Even in the anime, it felt like the whole saga ended there even with the filler. The filler felt more like an extension of the beginning of Skypiea rather than an extension of the end of the previous Saga.Mugiwara Franky 17:51, April 9, 2010 (UTC)

Streamline the Episode Titles?

I just took a look at some of the episode titles, and I realized something. The FUNimation titles are 95% accurate, and in fact are MORE Accurate in some areas than what we have here now. Is it possible we can streamline the episode listings and change it so the episodes are listed with FUNimation's uncut titles? Now, I know some of you don't like anything English One Piece, so we could even use more "Japanese" terms in place of the English terms (Like "Nyaban Brothers" Vs "Meowban Brothers", etc) But, I think there definitely needs to be a change since a lot of these titles are currently the K-F Titles (I think) and are actually somewhat off of what's really being said. Case-In-Point

Episode 8 - Title used here - "Who Will Win? Showdown Between the True Powers of the Devil!"

Episode 8 - Romanji Title - "Shōsha wa Docchi? Akuma no Mi no Nōryoku Taiketsu!"

Notice the bold parts. The Japanese title says "Akuma No Mi" That's clearly "Devil Fruit" and not just "Devil" (Akuma) Now...

Episode 8 - FUNimation's Title - "Who is the Victor? Devil Fruit Power Showdown!"

Yes, that's FUNimation's title being MORE accurate than what is written here. And it's not the only one.

Episode 31 - Title used here - "The Most Wicked Man of East Blue, Fishman Pirate Arlong"

Episode 31 - Romanji Title - "Higashi no umi saiaku no otoko! Gyojin kaizoku Āron!"

Notice the bold parts. The Japanese title says "Higashi no umi", not "Īsuto Burū" which would be "East Blue".

Episode 31 - FUNimation's Title - "The Worst Man in the Eastern Seas! Fishman Pirate Arlong!"

Not only is FUNimation usually MORE accurate, but these are verifiable official titles we can use Vs. Kaizoku Fansubs' unofficial titles.

Now, I'm NOT talking about using the Edited TV titles, just fixing the titles to read with their official, Accurate English titles as the DVDs come out. It also seems the Wikia goes out of its way not to use the FUNimation simulcast titles despite the fact that they're usually MORE accurate as well. I mean

Episode 449 - Title used here - "Magellan's Clever Scheme! The Jailbreak Plan is Obstructed"

Episode 449 - Romanji Title - "Mazeran no Kisaku! Habamareta Datsugoku Keikaku"

The Japanese title says "Frustrated Escape Plan", it doesn't mention "Jail" at all.

Episode 449 - FUNimation's Title - "Magellan's Tricky Move! A Foiled Escaped Plan!"

That is so close, that it's almost as if this Wiki is purposely going out of its way to use something other than FUNi's titles for the sake of using something other than FUNi's titles. Can we please streamline this? Use FUNi's titles entirely except for where terms clash (IE: Use FUNi's title for Episode 1, but put "Pirate King" instead of "King of the Pirates")? And don't bring up the amount of work that would need to be done, I'm prepared to do it all on my own.DemonRin 15:36, June 10, 2010 (UTC)

95% is not 100% and we don’t compete FUNimation to translation. FUNi or VIZ can do whatever they want with their translations. If we change to FUNi and VIZ titles then beside names there will no other changes in translation. So if someone want to translate for example (episode 449) 脱獄 to jailbrake then we should revert the edit because of FUNimation usually MORE accurate translation but if we edit the translation then we will lead here we are now. What is the point to copy their translation and them change names and others and claim that this is our(is not their) translation?

You really give me the impression that you don’t really want to help here. If you wanted to help, you would have already corrected the translation in episodes 8 and 31. However, you just point out some mistranslation telling us how "accurate" translation FUNimation does. Tipota 23:24, June 10, 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, is English not your first language? I don't fully understand what you're saying here. I will say, if we used FUNimation's translation, we wouldn't be able to claim it as "Ours" as much as the current titles taken from the K-F Translations and other fansub translations already aren't "Ours".

And Of course I want to help, but I don't know what the current standard is, and I don't want to start making blind corrections that will just get revertedDemonRin 23:49, June 10, 2010 (UTC)

Tipota already said that we don't use FUNi and Viz. I don't know why you're still arguing it. 166.137.13.100 23:35, June 12, 2010 (UTC)

So, we ARE Not using it "for the sake" of not using it then? Got it I guess. So the Several titles that are translated incorrectly need to stay incorrect?DemonRin 00:50, June 13, 2010 (UTC)

No, you translate them properly instead of using FUNi's or complaining about it. Like Tipota said, you should help instead of just telling us off and screwing everything up with the translations and the "nakama" business with buh. 166.137.13.15 03:22, June 13, 2010 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but where am I "telling you off"? And I only change it to translate "Nakama" because it's not a proper noun (like the Devil Fruits, Shichibukai, etc) and there is no official source at all that leads credence to the argument that it needs to be left untranslated. DemonRin 03:40, June 13, 2010 (UTC)

Demonrin, maybe it would be best if you use your own translation when you see a mistake. Since you are fluent in Japanese, I think we can trust you on the result. Lot's of the wiki editors like myself are not english or american and have therefore no access to the FUNI subs, so I don't think it is appropriate to give them more credits than others (Also there is a dedicate place for the FUNI title in the episode box). Kdom 06:28, June 13, 2010 (UTC)

Nakama translation

Moved to->Forum:Nakama Translation

Marineford Filler

Should all of these filler episodes be considered part of the Marineford arc? Or should they be separate, like with the Buggy and Coby/Helmeppo side-stories? I'd say 5/6 episodes is kinda pushing it. The Pope 04:41, June 21, 2010 (UTC)

What Filler? The animated Straw Hat cover stories that were in the manga? Those should definitely get their own section, but they aren't fillerDemonRin 05:51, June 21, 2010 (UTC)

Well, there's also the upcoming episode which is just a recap. And a lot of the stuff in these episodes were filler, like Sanji's fight with the "stand-in" and those creatures fighting Zoro. The Pope 06:33, June 21, 2010 (UTC)

There was also like, 10 minutes worth of Buggy-Mr. 3 Filler added to several episodes of the Impel Down arc, but we don't consider that Filler. Those episodes were padded-out Canon material just like the entire ID arc was.DemonRin 08:28, June 21, 2010 (UTC)

For the Straw Hat coverstories, they kinda fall in the same category as the Buggy and Coby coverstories that were covered in the anime.

For the upcoming brothers special flashback episode, not really sure what to make of it yet. From the preview, it seems to be more than just simple recap as it appears to include scenes that are supposed to be revealed much later in the story. Best wait till it airs before making any final decisions.Mugiwara Franky 10:17, June 21, 2010 (UTC)

I think they should be put together with the first round of whereabouts episodes. There is a similar problem with these ones either, chapter 424 is considered part of Impel Down while the corresponding episodes are part of Amazon Lily arc. If next episode is a recap, it should be treated the same way as the ones from Enies Lobby, but I agree with Mugiware Franky, let's wait until it is premiered to see exactly what it is. Kdom 21:44, June 22, 2010 (UTC)

Technically, the Marineford arc should start with Episode 459. Episode 452 was the epilogue to the Impel Down Arc, and was treated as such, being the last episode before the Nakama's Whereabouts episodes (which, considering that they got an entire half episode for each of the crew members out of only two manga frames each, could be considered mostly filler). The two flashback episodes could be considered a prologue to Marineford (they even say "Before Marineford" in their titles), but 459 was the first episode that contained any plot from the Marineford arc, and even got a brand new OP to signify that.

I think 452 should be moved to the end of Impel Down. 453-458 Should either also be moved to the end of Impel Down, or 453-456 be given their own section, like the Buggy and Coby-Meppo side stories, with 457-458 staying in Marineford as prologue episodes. About 8 months ago, Mugiwara Franky and I had a similar conversation about the original Nakama's Whereabouts episodes, and all 8 of the story points he listed there were covered in these episodes.LazerWulf 16:00, July 21, 2010 (UTC)

Awesome!!

Who ever made the color guide for this is a cool guy/girl...really appreciate it:)--彡•Roranoa zoro ^[Talk] ✯12:52,6/19/2011

Anime coming back.

I've read that one piece's anime is going to start the New world arc on October 2nd. Shouldn't that be stated somewhere on the article? http://www.animenewsnetwork.co.uk/news/2011-08-19/one-piece-anime-enters-new-world-arc-on-october-2 TwistedK 21:03, August 20, 2011 (UTC)

Page Layout

The Post War arc is about to end, and it's the last arc of the saga so the next saga is like a month away. I waned to ask, how are we going to include the next saga in the Navigation section? It seems to be a little problem because it reached the end of the page, so we have to find a way to include this saga. I think it's important to raise this question now before the arc will end and we won't know what to do. Strawhat1 14:30, August 29, 2011 (UTC)

There's no such thing as an end of the page. It will just expand when the information is added. SeaTerror 19:03, September 1, 2011 (UTC)

by saying 'the end of the page' i meant that the navigation section has reached the width of the page, and i wanted to know what are we going to do about it, because the page can't just expand to the widt. Strawhat1 16:01, September 2, 2011 (UTC)

The page can' t expand for navigation, but truly saying I don' t know the way the wiki edits the nav. section.I prefer to make it Part 1 and part 2 from u r statement.((((Stone Roger)))) ~ Talk~ One piece wiki 08:08, September 4, 2011 (UTC)

Next Episodes

here are the following episodes titles and air dates:

• 515: I'll get stronger and stronger! Zoro's vow to his captain - Sep. 18
• 516: Luffy's training begins. See you 2 years later, at the promised place - Sep. 25
• 517: New Chapter begins. Regroup! Straw Hat Pirates - Oct. 2 (beginning of the next arc)
• 518: Another Straw Hat Pirates (tentative) - ???

shouldn't we add those to the episode guide? Strawhat1 04:40, September 11, 2011 (UTC)

New World Saga Navigation

So I have added the new world saga to the episode guide with confirmed episode titles & translations. Now most people are worrying about the navigation. for now i am adding the new world saga to the end how it normally is (look at the episode guide navigation). After the new world saga has finished i will then start moving it and the others that come after it below. This is just a rough idea of how i want it to look like assuming there are 5 sagas after the time-skip:

East Blue Saga	Baroque Works Saga	Skypiea Saga	CP9 Saga	Whitebeard War Saga
Captain Morgan Arc (1-3)	Laboon Arc (62-63)	Goat Island Arc (136-138)	Davy Back Fight Arc (207-219)	Ice Hunter Arc (326-336)
Buggy the Clown Arc (4-8)	Whiskey Peak Arc (64-67)	Rainbow Mist Arc (139-143)	Ocean's Dream Arc (220-224)	Thriller Bark Arc (337-381)
Kuro Arc (9-18)	Coby and Helmeppo Arc (68-69)	Jaya Arc (144-152)	Foxy's Return Arc (225-226)	Spa Island Arc (382-384)
Baratie Arc (19-30)	Little Garden Arc (70-78)	Skypiea Arc (153-195)	Water 7 Arc (227-263)	Sabaody Archipelago Arc (385-405)
Arlong Arc (31-45)	Drum Island Arc (79-91)	G-8 Arc (196-206)	Enies Lobby Arc (264-312)	Amazon Lily Arc (408-421)
Buggy Side Story Arc (46-47)	Alabasta Arc (92-130)		Post-Enies Lobby Arc (313-325)	Impel Down Arc (422-451)
Loguetown Arc (48-53)	Post-Alabasta Arc (131-135)			Marineford Arc (452-489)
Warship Island Arc (54-61)				Post-War Arc (490-516)
New World Saga	Saga	Saga	Saga	Saga
Return to Sabaody Arc (517-)	Ark
Ark
Ark
Ark
Ark

I do not plan on adding 1 or 2 sagas and leaving empty space next them, so i want to make it look like this (i just roughly made this in about 5-10 minutes in paint):

http://i1230.photobucket.com/albums/ee493/DuelMaster93/OP_EpGuideNav.jpg

but i don't know how to do this without creating a complete new table. I can put them separate, but personally i think it's better joined, but i'll let everyone else decide on that. if you do find a way to do it please post it under this topic.

let me know what you think of my idea, and please do not insult my idea or be rude etc. this is only a suggestion. i am not forcing anyone to follow through with my idea.

First one is far better than the second one. SeaTerror 07:43, September 15, 2011 (UTC)

Agree.. If we should pick one it should be the first one. It looks good.  LPK  what? -09:37,9/15/2011-

first one is better --Strawhat1 16:11, September 15, 2011 (UTC)

I was actually wondering if (considering the length of the page) if it might not be better to tab the page with "Part 2" or something and continue the episode guide there. It would also be easier to navigate.  YazzyDream  Talk  Admin  ★  05:24,9/25/2011 

The first pic here shows how it should be. I don't think we should split it. SeaTerror 07:00, September 25, 2011 (UTC)

People, what is going on with the navigation? Down in the episode list there are both the Fishman Island Saga and New World Saga, however up top in navigation there is only the New World Saga.

Also, are you guys planning on splitting the navigation into two as previously stated? --42shilo42 (talk) 11:47, December 23, 2012 (UTC)

Adding episodes 406 and 407 three options

First let me start off by saying how incompetent it looks that we have one hole exactly one hole in the episode guide, this hole consists of episode 406 and 407 that deal with the Historical Boss Luffy timeline and were aired between the Sabaody Archipelago Arc and Amazon Lily Arc. An incomplete list is a bad list. We now have three options:

Option 1: Making episode 406 and 407 part of the Sabaody Archipelago Arc meaning you will see episodes 385 till 407 in the template for Saboady and here on the main episode guide. (in stead of 385-405)

then

Option 2: Making them part of the Amazon Lily Arc meaning the Amazon Lilly Arc Template changes from episodes 408 till 421 to episodes 406 till 421

then we have

Option 3: which is deciding it is it's own little mini arc and making A new row for it on the Episode Guide Template and also making a new page for this arc since every arc must have it's own page. This option will cost the most of time and entails the most work.

Work, difficulty and time aside I am personally willing to do all the work for each of these options however only for these three options, I can't stress this enough but there aren't any other options, leaving things as they are, is unproffesional, incompetent and downright lazy. To be fair to everyone I enable a vote.

This vote will take place by putting one's username under one of the options, dubbel votes don't count. I will keep the vote open for exactly one week (ends january 5th 2012) after that week I will start implementing the option which has been voted on the most. My personal vote, is now already included.

Vote

• Option 1

• Option 2

• Option 3

1.  Tuckyd  Idea Station  Hi There  23:47, January 29, 2012 (UTC)

PS: Please remember my motto Quality over Quantity, you might have a lot of edits, but that doesnt 'mean your better then anyone else it just means you editted a lot times, not necessarily a lot. I still have low edit count on this site, but I only just joined the wikia this past week. But I am however no stranger to editting nor am I a stranger to site building I have had one other wikia account in the past and several wikipedia accounts, not to mention accounts on non-wikia related open community sites.' January 30, 2012 OnePieceNation.

Chapters Format

Going back through the earlier episodes, it seems that the format for listing the chapters is different. On more recent episodes, the format is Chapter # and pages if needed. The old format, on all episodes up to Episode 84 is shown as Chapter ___ (_-_/_). Which format would be better?

Galaxy9000 23:55, July 1, 2012 (UTC)

Just follow the layout of the newest episode. We're revamping all of the episode pages now because they had different layouts. Thanks.  Jade Talk   00:50, July 2, 2012 (UTC)

TV Specials, OVA's & Movies Debate

Here is a list of what the majority of users on this wikia think they are:

OVA:

1. One Piece - Defeat Him! The Pirate Ganzack
2. One Piece: Romance Dawn Story
3. One Piece Film Strong World Episode:0

TV Specials:

• Emergency Planning, A Perfect Strategy for the One Piece

1. Adventure in the Ocean's Navel
2. Open Upon the Great Sea! A Father's Huge, HUGE Dream!
3. Protect! The Last Great Performance
4. The Detective Memoirs of Chief Straw Hat Luffy
5. Episode of Nami: Tears of a Navigator and the Bonds of Nakama

Movies:

1. One Piece: The Movie
2. Clockwork Island Adventure
3. Chopper's Kingdom on the Island of Strange Animals
4. Dead End Adventure
5. Curse of the Sacred Sword
6. Baron Omatsuri and the Secret Island
7. The Giant Mechanical Soldier of Karakuri Castle
8. Episode of Alabasta: The Desert Princess and the Pirates
9. Episode of Chopper Plus: Bloom in Winter, Miracle Sakura
10. One Piece Film: Strong World
11. One Piece 3D: Straw Hat Chase
12. One Piece Film: Z

Here is a list of what I believe they are

OVA:

1. One Piece - Defeat Him! The Pirate Ganzack
2. One Piece: Romance Dawn Story
3. One Piece Film Strong World Episode:0
4. One Piece 3D: Straw Hat Chase

TV Specials:

1. Emergency Planning, A Perfect Strategy for the One Piece
2. Adventure in the Ocean's Navel
3. Open Upon the Great Sea! A Father's Huge, HUGE Dream!
4. Protect! The Last Great Performance
5. The Detective Memoirs of Chief Straw Hat Luffy
6. Episode of Nami: Tears of a Navigator and the Bonds of Nakama

Movies:

1. One Piece: The Movie
2. Clockwork Island Adventure
3. Chopper's Kingdom on the Island of Strange Animals
4. Dead End Adventure
5. Curse of the Sacred Sword
6. Baron Omatsuri and the Secret Island
7. The Giant Mechanical Soldier of Karakuri Castle
8. Episode of Alabasta: The Desert Princess and the Pirates
9. Episode of Chopper Plus: Bloom in Winter, Miracle Sakura
10. One Piece Film: One Piece: Strong World
11. One Piece Film: Z

Reasons

'One Piece 3D: Straw Hat Chase' is not a movie: It is a OVA because was deliberately released as 'JUMP Heroes Film'. Not one promotional piece of merchandise, interview or such ever called it 'the 11th One Piece movie'. In retrospective they MIGHT to save face but it's very strange that in all the interviews no one, not even the voice cast, called it the 11th film. It was never marketed as a movie like the others, and had little hype and promotion. Like a OVA, it was released on DVD only for a limited time. It does not a proper website, like the other movies. it is only shown on the home page of the jump heroes film website. Also when reffering to 'One Piece Film: Z', Strong World is said to be the previous film. Also after the Episode Of Chopper film aired on TV, there was a promo for Strong World. After Strong World was aired on TV, there was a promo for Z, confirming Z as the 11th movie. It is an OVA.

'Emergency Planning, A Perfect Strategy for the One Piece' should be Episode Special 1: There is no reason why it shouldn't be. It is a TV special because it airs on tv and is not a numbered episode, making it a TV special. Also it was released with 'Adventure in the Ocean's Navel', another TV special. 'Open Upon the Great Sea! A Father's Huge, HUGE Dream!' & 'Protect! The Last Great Performance' were also released together, confirming this as the first TV special.

Note: This is fair warning, that I will soon be changing this. If anyone has any objections as to why I am wrong, then please comment below, and we will discuss it. I am only doing this to avoid edit wars in the future and to make sure everyone agrees with my opinion --DuelMaster93 (talk) 11:38, August 12, 2012 (UTC)

Can you give us a good source for the claim that Z is said to be the 11th film? JustSomeDude...  Talk | 21:51, August 18, 2012 (UTC)

OVA means Original Video Animation not "Original Video Limited Edition Animation." So no using the limited edition thing is a terrible excuse. SeaTerror (talk) 02:18, August 19, 2012 (UTC)

Ok JustSomeDude..., Can you give us a good source for the claim that Straw Hat Chase is said to the 11th film? One Piece Film: Z is the 11th film because after Strong World aired on TV, the promo called this the next movie, just like after Episode of Chopper aired on TV, the promo called Strong World the next movie. It also has it's own website like every other One Piece movie (not including Straw Hat Chase)

And SeaTerror, I am well aware what OVA means. But in the case of One Piece, every OVA released has been limited edition. Ok, maybe it isn't a OVA, but it certainly isn't a movie. It is a Jump Heroes Film, at best. --DuelMaster93 (talk) 13:34, August 19, 2012 (UTC)

So a commercial said it was the next movie, but didn't say it was the 11th movie. That already confirms you have no proof. Straw Hat Chase isn't going to be advertised in a commercial after a tv airing as the "next movie". They would obviously advertise Z next. Same with your chopper thing as well. Also, a Jump Heroes Film is a movie. Galaxy9000 (talk) 14:08, August 19, 2012 (UTC)'

Ok Galaxt9000, tell me why Straw Hat Chase never received the same promotion like the Z & Strong World. Tell me why there is no website for it, like other movies. tell me why it was shown for free at the JUMP Anime Tour, something that wasn't done with the other movies, but was done with all the other OVAs. Tell me why this "movie" only runs for 30 mins. Exactly, it isn't a movie, at best it is a JUMP Heores Film

Movie 1 is 50 minutes. It probably did recieve "some" promotion, but you don't know where to find it. And about it being shown free, that doesn't really matter at all. And calling it a jump heroes film still classifies it as the 11th movie. Galaxy9000 (talk) 14:20, August 19, 2012 (UTC)

Wrong again. All movies received a fair promotion, where Straw Hat Chase did not. it is called a jump heroes film, because it was made by Jump Heroes, not toei, so it can not be listed with the toei movies. The purpose of making movies is to make money. they wouldn't show it at an Anime Tour, before it's release date for free, otherwise they wouldn't make money and ruin the point of making it in the first place. the other movies aired on tv after they were released, so that was ok. all Straw Hat Chase received was about 2 posters and a 20 second promo. Straw Hat Chase was only made to promote Toriko. Jump Heroes Films are promotional films, not actual official movies.--DuelMaster93 (talk) 14:29, August 19, 2012 (UTC)

It seems you got your information from Greg of the One Piece Podcast. Yeah just stop now. Galaxy9000 (talk) 14:31, August 19, 2012 (UTC)

No, I only elaborated on what he was saying. the promo, and website stuff was what i came up with. at least i have information. lololololololololololololol.DuelMaster93 (talk) 14:36, August 19, 2012 (UTC)

Your information from Greg is wrong. He's known to come up with stupid theories. Movie 11 is 3D Chase. Done argueing with you now that i know your source. Galaxy9000 (talk) 14:40, August 19, 2012 (UTC)

The original stuff I wrote was true anyway.What he wrote were valid points and was very solid, unlike what you are writting. At least I have sources. im done talking with you. Your not intellegent enough to debate anything with me properly, just like it say in your occupation as a student (probably a year 1 student of elementary/primary). lololololDuelMaster93 (talk) 14:47, August 19, 2012 (UTC)

"What he wrote were valid points and was very solid" I laughed so hard. Please keep it up. SeaTerror (talk) 17:13, August 19, 2012 (UTC)

Ok, if the that preview said "the next movie" then you're wrong. If that preview said at any point, the NUMBER 11 then you're right. But it sounds to me like you're wrong. It sounds to me like you are twisting the words of someone and making assumptions and speculations. The word "next" would refer to the movie that would next be released, not next in regard to what was shown on TV before it.

And this is a wikia, we work on facts that can be referenced. If you really want to support your argument, you're going to need to give us a valid source. You're going to have to find a statement released by the makers of One Piece that confirms your opinions. You'll need to give us a link to this information. If it's a translated statement, you're going to have to find the original statement in Japanese so that someone here can confirm that the translation is in fact correct. The OP podcast is not a valid source, it is filled with biased fan opinion and is not connected to the series in any official capacity. If you can't find a valid source, then this argument is over.

Your point may be compelling, but without any official confirmation of it, it's just opinion and does not belong here. JustSomeDude...  Talk | 01:22, August 20, 2012 (UTC)

i respect the fact, that my points are mostly opinions based on things I have seen. I know what I have seen may not necessaraly mean that One Piece Film: Z is the 11th movie, but all I'm saying is in the comparisons I've made with past movies, there isn't really any real evidence that Straw Hat Chase is the 11th movie.

If you expect me to provide original reliable source information as to why Z is the 11th movie, then I expect whoever claims Straw Hat Chase is the 11th movie provide something also.

Here is my final observation:

The official website for every one piece movie so far has been on onepiece-movie.com. The posters from movies 8-onwards show this web adress on it. Whenever a new movie is released the movie website is moved to a website like this toei-anim.co.jp/movie/2009/ for example, and is replaced with a new site for the new movie. They had done this with every movie except Straw Hat Chase. Interestingly Straw Hat Chase has the www.jump-heroesfilm.com written on it instead of onepiece-movie.com, like they did with the other movie posters that have web adresses on them. That was the only web adress it has ever gotten. Also, isn't it strange that www.jump-heroesfilm.com is the official website and has no individual page on the website for example www.jump-heroesfilm.com/onepiecefilm.

Im not saying Straw Hat Chase is not the 11th movie. Im just saying there is more evidence that Z is the 11th movie then Straw Hat Chase, based on what I have observed.

*If you want to look at these movie posters, they are on the wikia, on their respective movie pages. There websites are also there too.

* Also, as far as im concerned, i've never heard anyone officially call the movies by their movie numbers. Correct me if im wrong.

Also, do you have any opinions against Emergency Planning, A Perfect Strategy for the One Piece being the first Episode Special? It airs in a normal time slot, takes just as long as a the other ones, and was released with the Adventure in the Ocean's Navel, just like how 'Open Upon the Great Sea! A Father's Huge, HUGE Dream!' & 'Protect! The Last Great Performance' were also released together.

Also, as far as I know, not everything on this wikia has been confirmed. There are things on this wikia that haven't been confirmed that exist on this wikia. The topics I am discussing hasn't been fully confirmed from either end and Im just trying to go with the more realistic theory or the opinion that makes more sense.

Remember, I am not forcing any changes. I am sorry if my opinions aren't supported enough with evidence, I just felt this had to be adressed, because these things bother me.

If my opinion is not welcome here, I am sorry. DuelMaster93 (talk) 14:45, August 20, 2012 (UTC)

Your points on Emergency Planning are fine. That's obviously the first episode special. And about 3D chase. Even if there isn't a one piece film website, that doesn't mean it isn't the 11th movie. Galaxy9000 (talk) 17:39, August 20, 2012 (UTC)

Z's Ambition Arc

Wouldn't it be better to make an arc between Fishman Island and Punk Hazard called Z's Ambition Arc and put the Z's Ambition filler episodes, "One Piece Film Z", "Episode of Luffy: Hand Island Adventure" and "Glorious Island" under that arc? They're not really related to either the Fishman Island arc nor the Punk Hazard arc. MACollector (talk) 17:22, December 17, 2012 (UTC)

So, after adding the Fishman Island Saga, I think it's better to put the Z arc in the new world saga as it's all placed in the new world. And, as said before me, isn't it better to put all four episodes, the movie, the special and GI in one arc named Z's Ambition Arc, it's quite long to stick all to PH! Viralz (talk) 20:55, December 20, 2012 (UTC)

Z's Ambition Arc It's not stuck to Punk Hazard. And I don't think movies are included in arcs. _••PX15.._•• 21:01, December 20, 2012 (UTC)

I just meant if it were going to be placed in the new world saga, and another question, isn't specials considered to be non canon to the actual story, Z arc is of course canon to the main story, it's not like the Little East blue arc, so i guess it would be better to consider them all as fillers. Viralz (talk) 21:12, December 20, 2012 (UTC)

Z's Ambition Arc is absolutely NOT canon. It's an Anime-only TV special episode. I also think that Z's Ambition should be attached to PH Arc, it wasn't at first because we hadn't decided yet whether to put 574 in PH or FI. Sewil 21:15, December 20 - 2012

I still think there should be an arc for episode 575-578 called Z's Ambition Arc. It should probably be the first arc in the New World Saga as the plot is placed there. --MACollector (talk) 00:56, December 21, 2012 (UTC)

Since you came to the 574 ep subject, It is certainly better to be placed with the PH now. firstly, the end is connected to the next arc (Z arc) secondly, it has no relation to do with the FMI and more importantly it's named TO THE NEW WORLD!! Viralz (talk) 21:27, December 20, 2012 (UTC)

This has already been discussed and closed. If you want to bump it, go to Talk:Episode 574. Sewil 22:32, December 20 - 2012

I think the Z's Ambition Arc should be featured as a separate arc on this list. The reason the Little East Blue movie lead-up arc isn't on the list is because it interrupts Marineford and was not connected to the current storyline, and even has some plot holes about where it would fit (Zoro's wounds from TB). Z's Ambition fits into the current storyline. To anime-only fans, the arc fits into the anime-canon story. It's really more of a filler arc than a special arc. JustSomeDude...  Talk | 22:50, February 17, 2013 (UTC)

Of course it should. We had it that way and somebody messed it up. You can fix it.   Galaxy 9000   22:51, February 17, 2013 (UTC)

Sewil edit warred over it last week, I don't want to start another right now. JustSomeDude...  Talk | 22:56, February 17, 2013 (UTC)

Episode articles design flaw

As it is now, the Episode articles has a trivial design flaw that may or may not disrupt a user depending on how much he cares for alignment. here is a comparison. As you can see at the top left corner, showing the current one (left) and the one without the extra space (right) which is aligned to the Episode Box, the right one looks so much better. Currently, there have been no reason to keep it as there is no found rule that this space must be there in Episode Page Layouts. I also asked SeaTerror why he keeps reverting my edits but simply stated that "it's fine as it is", which it isn't. Sewil 6:44, January 20 - 2013

You really are the only one that even cares about that. In fact your version is even worst because it tries to smush the episode number together with the episode title. The way we have been doing it is much better. You even claimed that people don't even like the current layout yet said "oh they just never said it". SeaTerror (talk) 06:53, January 20, 2013 (UTC)

Yuck. That's extra space is terrible Sewil. I agree that it should be fixed.   Galaxy 9000   06:54, January 20, 2013 (UTC)

Me only caring about it is only an assumption and it's still not a valid reason to keep it even if it undoubtedly would be true. As I explained, this is a PREVIEW, which doesn't look like the actual visualization when you publish it. In normal view, the titles has a line under it, as seen here, so it wont be "smushed" together.Sewil 7:01, January 20 - 2013

You're right. It is trivial. Don't worry about it. It makes little difference.DancePowderer Talk 07:07, January 20, 2013 (UTC)

It makes a difference. Why not fix it if it's that trivial? Your logic amazes me. Really. Sewil 7:09, January 20 - 2013

DP it's a pretty big problem. Anyways, if it's such a little difference, then why can't it be fixed?   Galaxy 9000   07:11, January 20, 2013 (UTC)

Your example really doesn't even matter. We already had the discussion on each other's talk pages. The space itself you keep mentioning is very trivial and doesn't harm anything. We decided on that space when we redid the episode format. The only thing that got reverted back was when we had removed external links to different language wikias. SeaTerror (talk) 07:17, January 20, 2013 (UTC)

I just explained exactly what it harms so you can't say it doesn't harm anything. Stop trying to escape the discussion and just give me a valid reason to keep it. So far I've seen no reason to keep it. If it's decided then I need a link or it didn't happen. Sewil 7:18, January 20 - 2013

Why fix what isn't broken? It's not harming anything, so I don't see what the deal is. The eye has to travel an extra centimeter or so to continue reading, so what? Not a travesty. I don't see how anything is smushed, as you put it. I don't see the problem here. All you're doing is trying to make more work for yourselves.DancePowderer Talk 07:28, January 20, 2013 (UTC)

If you've ever gone to a website design class you should know that lines and texts should be aligned. It is harming something and it's a flaw in the design. Why should I explain this more than one time? SeaTerror said it was smushed, please read through that again. Sewil 7:31, January 20 - 2013

Also, we strive to make the pages look as good as possible right? Then I don't see the problem in removing the space since it doesn't look good and isn't aligned with the template. Sewil 7:32, January 20 - 2013

They look terrible DP. They should be fixed.   Galaxy 9000   07:35, January 20, 2013 (UTC)

It was decided in chat actually so there won't be any links unless somebody saved some screenshots, which I doubt. You keep trying to "explain" when it doesn't even matter which we have already repeatedly said. It does not look bad nor does it really even matter. You were the first person who ever said anything about it. Nobody ever did before. We made the episode layouts uniform starting from episode 1 and onward. It first started after people deleted the trivia section which became the anime notes section as soon as it was realized we could still use it. We went back to put the stuff in and then noticed other things were different so we made each episode uniform until we had finished them all. Eventually we were going to do chapters and did a lot of them but it was never completed. SeaTerror (talk) 07:47, January 20, 2013 (UTC)

Okay so here's what I've got so far;

• You don't have any links to the space having a reason to be there.
• You think it doesn't matter if it's there or not.
• You think it's a trivial thing.
• You keep repeating the same thing even though it isn't a valid reason to not remove it.

So yeah. I have given my reasons and the only things you can come up with is that "it doesn't matter", well if it doesn't matter then I guess you don't care if I remove them? Great. Sewil 7:49, January 20 - 2013

Read what I said again. Keep reading it until you get it. SeaTerror (talk) 20:46, January 20, 2013 (UTC)

I say we change it still. Your reasons are terrible ST. It's a design flaw.   Galaxy 9000   20:48, January 20, 2013 (UTC)

It isn't a design flaw at all. You both just keep saying that. The space that is mentioned isn't even bad. This can go to vote as soon as the vote forum is over. SeaTerror (talk) 20:50, January 20, 2013 (UTC)

The space is terrible. So yes it is a design flaw. You just don't want it fixed because you took the time to mess it up.   Galaxy 9000   20:51, January 20, 2013 (UTC)

How is adding an extra space a flaw? If you're going to complain about it, at least call it what it is, an relative inconsistency.DancePowderer Talk 20:53, January 20, 2013 (UTC)

Sure I'll call it that, but there's no reason not to fix it when we definitely can. (Even the bot could do it.)   Galaxy 9000   20:55, January 20, 2013 (UTC)

Nah DP it isn't inconsistent since we did it to all Episodes. There really is no design flaw to it anyway. SeaTerror (talk) 20:56, January 20, 2013 (UTC)

Once again ST, you just don't want it fixed because you put in the work to do it. There's no reason not to get rid of an unneeded space.   Galaxy 9000   20:58, January 20, 2013 (UTC)

The reasons were already given. You're just complaining to complain about something now. SeaTerror (talk) 21:02, January 20, 2013 (UTC)

Your reason is "it doesn't matter", but it obviously does. Once again, you're the one complaining about people wanting to fix your mistakes.   Galaxy 9000   21:03, January 20, 2013 (UTC)

It doesn't since nobody ever said anything about it before Sewil mentioned it. There is also no mistake at all. SeaTerror (talk) 21:05, January 20, 2013 (UTC)

I can fix it for you if you do think it's such a pain in the ass. Will you be happy then? And SeaTerror, what DP means with relative inconsistency is that it contradicts the design of other articles whom have the lines aligned as they should. And just because nobody mentioned it doesn't make it right. It's like if I were to find a dead body in a forest and not call it wrong. I really don't see why you're resisting when you obviously don't care for it as much as I do. Sewil 21:41, January 20 - 2013

Prove that this is even an issue. You really were the first person to have ever said anything about it. There is nothing wrong with the space. Like I already said this is only being brought up because people want to complain about something just to complain. SeaTerror (talk) 22:43, January 20, 2013 (UTC)

Are you even serious? Are you even reading my posts? I've said at least 5 times what's wrong with it and you have nothing to come with. Jesus fucking Christ, try using your brain and stop acting so ignorant. Sewil 23:14, January 20 - 2013

You have not given any real reason to change it. Seriously. What you show is a very miniscule space that is very noticable unless you are looking for it. You were the only person to complain about it when it doesn't even matter. The space does not need to be removed like you keep insisting. I could understand if the space actually broke the coding of the article or templates on the wikia. Then obviously it would need to be removed. SeaTerror (talk) 23:34, January 20, 2013 (UTC)

Like I said, it breaks alignment and doesn't look good. Gal sees this too. And, really, try thinking about it, if it can be fixed, why not fix it? Why insist that you're right when you don't have any arguments behind your opinion? Sewil 0:06, January 21 - 2013

ST, if you can't provide reasons other than "it doesn't matter" then just stand down and allow us to do it.   Galaxy 9000   00:08, January 21, 2013 (UTC)

Has anyone noticed that it been like this for years and no one complained about until Sewil brought it up? Anyways, it looks fine with the space. If you guys just want to change it because you want more edits *coughGalaxycough* that's a stupid reason to do it. Making a simple and in my opinion "stupid" edit as this is just worthless and is a just a waste of spending time doing all the episodes. Just leave as it is.    Karoo    ❖    Talk    00:36, January 21, 2013 (UTC)

Sewil, how about you stop changing it while the discussion is ongoing? Standards dude.  Fanta Talk  00:41, January 21, 2013 (UTC)

I know right. You're spamming the RC and if the removing the space wins, we could get a Bot to do so. This is just showing us that you guys just want the edits.    Karoo    ❖    Talk    00:46, January 21, 2013 (UTC)

First of all, minor edits doesn't give me edit counts, second of all, I'm tired of this stupid discussion with ignorant resistors who won't give me a good reason to not do it and just keep on trolling. Sewil 0:48, January 21 - 2013

Minor edits do give you edit count Sewil.   Galaxy 9000   00:49, January 21, 2013 (UTC)

Guess we all have to undo your edits now since the discussion isn't over. SeaTerror (talk) 00:50, January 21, 2013 (UTC)

Well have a bot do it for us then if you don't want me to gain edit counts. What's the problem? And ST, you undoing everything just means you want editcount too. Sewil 0:53, January 21 - 2013

It is because you started changing it when the discussion wasn't over. That's the reason why your edits need to be undone. SeaTerror (talk) 00:55, January 21, 2013 (UTC)

Give. Me. Your. Reasons. I still haven't heard it from you, is it some rules? Has it already been discussed somewhere? Do you think it looks better? Just do it, so we can resolve this faster. Currently we are going nowhere and it's driving me nuts. Sewil 0:58, January 21 - 2013

I already gave you my reasons multiple times. Right now what you are doing is technically vandalism because you are changing something when discussion isn't over yet. The only reason you could come up with was "It's a design flaw!!!!!1111111" when it really isn't. The space is just there and nobody once said anything about it until you started making a big deal out of absolutely NOTHING. SeaTerror (talk) 01:03, January 21, 2013 (UTC)

Your reasons are that it doesn't matter. That isn't a reason. That's your opinion on this whole subject which kinda makes it that I can remove the space without you caring. It is too a design flaw, because, as I said, it isn't aligned with the top, and it's like you would input two "<br />"'s under the template which any sane human would consider idiotic. Also; comparison. Sewil 1:07, January 21 - 2013

I already gave you other reasons. Nice job trying to ignore what I said. Nice comparison again BTW. It still doesn't matter because it is miniscule and is not an actual design flaw. If you can find the space harming a template or an article in some way then yes go ahead and change it. At least it would be for a good reason. SeaTerror (talk) 01:17, January 21, 2013 (UTC)

And once again all you say is there's no reason to. Give a valid response.   Galaxy 9000   01:25, January 21, 2013 (UTC)

Aghh.... didn't saw in time this discussion... the extra space is much better-looking in source mode, so don't remove it (not that is so important, anyway). Obviously I don't want an empty start line, but here the thing: that empty line is created by the episode infobox, so is sufficient to fix it. I'll try to do it. leviathan_89 01:26, 21 January, 2013 (UTC)

ST: I read it through and your only other reason was that "We decided on that space when we redid the episode format.", which doesn't give me any details at all. Who decided that? Does it say anywhere? You also said that this was decided over chat which kind of sound like you're just trying to come up with excuses because you have no proof of it.

It is a design flaw because normally everything is aligned to the top left, with no gaps. When you input the space, you force the text downwards without any proper reason and it doesn't look any better than it normally should. I mean come on, when you are writing an essay, do you first start by inputting a gap before your headline? It just looks wrong.

And, again, if something is or looks wrong, it can be fixed. This can be fixed by a bot, even. Under a second. This discussion has lasted for like a day. Sewil 1:28, January 21 - 2013

Ok, both Sewil and Galaxy, you guys aren't giving valid reasons either. The only reason you guys are giving is something similar to "it looks better" and that's pretty much it. That's the only reason, when the space has more than just one. I agree with Levi on the space does looks better in source mode (since that's the only thing I use).    Karoo    ❖    Talk    01:30, January 21, 2013 (UTC)

The blank starting line is worse in my opinion, but since I fixed I think there is no issue anymore. leviathan_89 01:41, 21 January, 2013 (UTC)

Levi: Shouldn't the top priority be the visual mode and not the source mode in terms of design? And I looked before and I saw no extra space in the Episode Box Template.

Calu: You're kind of contradicting yourself as you are saying that it looks better in source mode, lol.Sewil 1:31, January 21 - 2013

It was part of the revamp of the episode layout, Levi. We don't need to do anything until the discussion is over. Most likely it would go to a vote anyway since Sewil and Galaxy are the only ones saying anything about it. You forgot that Both Coffee and Calu said that we decided to change it? They both said it in chat today. The space is fine. There is nothing to change. This only happened because people wanted to find something to complain about just to complain about something. SeaTerror (talk) 01:33, January 21, 2013 (UTC)

No I complain on it because ^ (scroll up). Now, give me proof that this has been decided, or, as said, it didn't happen. (sigh) Sewil 1:35, January 21 - 2013

And again you continue to say it doesn't matter. Your reasoning skills are terrible.

Calu: Your reasons are, "it doesn't matter". Those aren't reasons. We've given our reasons as to why it looks like crap, but you and ST continue to spout out "it doesn't matter" in response, when it does. Stop being sore about us wanting to change a problem when you really don't care one bit.

Also, it was decided in chat.. not a decision.   Galaxy 9000   01:37, January 21, 2013 (UTC)

Done. Even if you separate the first line and the template's code with a blank line in source mode, the first line will be on top of the page.
@Sewil: with "visual mode" you usually refer to the editor visual mode, and no it's not a priority that because it's a surrogate editor, source mode is in fact the actual editor. You probably meant the page itself, and yes, I think that's the priority (to make the article look nice), but since the issue here was the template's fault, there is no issue at all. The blank line was added not because there was a blank line at the end of the template, but because there was a line break, thus the template box was rendered in a paragraph which would make the first line go down (since the template would be considered as first line)
@ST: ?? leviathan_89 01:41, 21 January, 2013 (UTC)

If that was the issue then most likely every template on here would need to be edited. Either way the main issue was it wasn't a big deal and Sewil started to change it when the discussion was ongoing. SeaTerror (talk) 01:47, January 21, 2013 (UTC)

Once again ST, "not a big deal" isn't a valid reason.   Galaxy 9000   01:48, January 21, 2013 (UTC)

Already gave my reasons before. Don't really need to state them again. The reason you both gave was about a "design flaw" that didn't even exist. That reason is pretty bad when you have to lie about something that isn't even there. SeaTerror (talk) 01:51, January 21, 2013 (UTC)

ST you can't decide stuff over chat lol. But whatever. Should I undo my edits or let a bot do it? Sewil 1:52, January 21 - 2013

I agree with galaxy though. On a side note, whenever you decide to do some major changing and start to do repeatedly edits, can you please use a bot or ask sff9? Keeping a slow pace works too. Flooding the recent changes is VERY ANNOYING and risky too, since you may "hide" vandalism or other important edits. Thank you. leviathan_89 01:54, 21 January, 2013 (UTC)

We can. It isn't a rule and if it is now it definitely wasn't a rule back then. The bot left so you might as well undo them now. SeaTerror (talk) 01:56, January 21, 2013 (UTC)

I've never seen something so minor have such a big discussion...uknownada ^Talk 02:12, January 21, 2013 (UTC)

You can thank ST. Sewil 2:22, January 21 - 2013

That is really hilariously ironic. SeaTerror (talk) 02:44, January 21, 2013 (UTC)

Fishman Island Saga/ Pirate Alliance Saga

I think they're the same Saga, you should consider them like that, or like "New World Saga", because they are not different at all, Fishman Island is only and arc, and has to do with New World Saga, it's not different, and in Fishman lsland, appears Smoker, what shows that it's the same Saga, and not only Smoker, many other things...

And it will help to the design, giving us more space for placing a new column, we should avoid making sagas with only two arcs.

Thank you.Imperioonepiece (talk) 02:13, February 20, 2013 (UTC)

Skypiea Saga.   Galaxy 9000   02:31, February 20, 2013 (UTC)

The reason why we have the saga with just two arcs is because the arcs together don't play a significant role to the next arc other than foreshadowing, or setting up events. Though whether or not it's safe to classify the Fishman Island Saga as a stand-alone saga is still up for debate. But as the next arc hasn't really begun yet, we can't really conclude to anything. It's more difficult to categorize sagas than it is arcs. For now, it's safest to have the arcs in their own Saga, since they pretty much meet the "qualifications" to do so. There's a possible chance to combine the sagas in the future, but it's unlikely and difficult to tell.

As for avoiding sagas with only two arcs, the Skypiea Saga has only two arcs as well. Since neither arc has any connection with the arcs around them, they're fit into their own saga.

Like I said, there's a possibility of the two sagas merging since they're still relatively young. Until then, keeping them separate is the safest option. uknownada ^Talk 05:07, February 20, 2013 (UTC)

Episodes 497 and 498

I'm not really sure, but I read the manga and I think episodes 497 and 498 are filler episodes, fact that isn't good in the episode guide.

PD: Sorry for mi english, it's not my fist language.

200.104.204.18 00:53, June 14, 2013 (UTC)

Episode 497 adapted 3 pages of Chapter 585. Episode 498 adapted a page from Chapter 584 and Chapter 585. It's not much, but its direction as filler could be debatable. uknownada ^Talk 01:23, June 14, 2013 (UTC)