What about the Engisgn position ?New Babylon 13:19, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
The way I see it, Admiral is the only position worthy to having its own page, seeing how long it is, and how powerful and respected the position is.04:31, December 17, 2011 (UTC)
Thank you. And, if anyone has any way of jamming Admiral into here, rather than leaving it its own page, please, feel free to try.18:59, December 17, 2011 (UTC)
I didn't see the forum until now. There should have been a vote since I think every rank should have been merged into it. You can even do tabs if needed. SeaTerror 19:04, December 18, 2011 (UTC)
Well, it wasn't just the forum, the talk page in the Marines, rank category, and other places were talking about merging for quite a while.20:09, December 18, 2011 (UTC)
Uh, that said, I find it confusing not to have a subheading above Fleet Admiral for Kong's Rank, Commander-in-Chief. At Fleet Admirals, it simply states Kong (Promoted). To what? 220.127.116.11 13:18, June 29, 2012 (UTC)
- Commander-in-Chief is a World Government position, and as such is not part of the Marines. This page is for Marine ranks only. Zodiaque 13:24, June 29, 2012 (UTC)
Coby & HelmeppoEdit
In Chapter 432 of the manga Coby and Helmeppo are ranked as Chief Petty Officer and Petty Officer, respectively. Yet here, Coby's a Master Chief Petty Officer and Helmeppo's a Chief Petty Officer. Did someone make a mistake here, or was I reading a different translation?18.104.22.168 21:09, June 27, 2012 (UTC)
Coby and Helmeppo were ranked as "sōchō" and "gunsō" respectively in Ch 432, same as they are on the wiki, so it was a different translation. Zodiaque 06:06, June 28, 2012 (UTC)
both the sengoku and the one piece film z pages have general inspector on them. the link leads to this (marine ranks) page which has no refernece to ths rank. I think that because we dont have any information one the rank yet we should remove the link
There is a rank of Major Inspecter held by a marine named Shephered
22.214.171.124 05:24, December 26, 2012 (UTC)Neutral Pirate
I made an organization of Marine ranks that accepts japanese original words (kanji) as a guide. I think we could and should group Marine ranks using what I think is OPverse's rationale instead of US Navy's rationale and structure. However I totally support the use of US Navy's denominations as translation reference of individual ranks.
大将官 Taisho-kan *Senior Flag Officers
— 総帥 Sosui [Taisho] *[全軍 Zengun *Forces] Supreme Commander [Admiral] **Commander-in-Chief —
MARINE OFFICER RANKS
— 元帥 Gensui [Taisho] *[海軍 Kaigun *Marine] Commander [Admiral] **Fleet Admiral —
— 大将 Taisho *Admiral —
将官 Shokan *Flag Officers
中将 Chujo *Vice Admiral
少将 Shosho *Rear Admiral
准将 Junsho *Commodore
佐官 Sakan *Senior Officers
大佐 Taisa *Captain
中佐 Chusa *Commander
少佐 Shosa *Lieutenant Commander
尉官 Ikan *Junior Officers
大尉 Taii *Lieutenant
中尉 Chui *Lieutenant Junior Grade
少尉 Shoi *Ensign
MARINE WARRANT RANKS
准尉 Juni *Quartermaster **Warrant Officer [No character]
MARINE ENLISTED RANKS
下士官 Kashikan *Non-commissioned Officers *Petty Officers
曹長 Socho *Major Sergeant **Master Chief Petty Officer
軍曹 Gunso *Sergeant **Chief Petty Officer
伍長 Gocho *Corporal **Petty Officer
海兵 Kaihei *Marines or 兵 Hei *Privates **Seamen
一等兵 Ittohei *Private 1/c **Seaman First Class
二等兵 Nitohei *Private 2/c **Seaman Apprentice
三等兵 Santohei *Private 3/c **Seaman Recruit || 新兵 Shinpei *Recruit
MARINE NON-ENLISTED PERSONNEL
雑用 Zatsuyo *Chore Boy
MARINE STAFF OFFICERS
大目付 Ometsuke *General Inspector
教官 Kyokan *Instructor
Obs. 2: In SBS Volume 24, Oda said Marine (海兵 Kaihei, used as Japanese translation of U.S. Marine Corps soldiers), not Sailor (水兵 Suihei, used as Japanese translation of U.S. Navy soldiers, the seamen). And more importante, there Oda used rank group like Ikan (尉官, Junior Officers) and Shokan (将官, Flag Officers). Exactly I'm suggesting here. Alelucas (talk) 00:38, October 20, 2013 (UTC)
I say leave it as it is. Since it is an english translation, readers should be familiar with the respective ranks.
I think we could just use the original names of ranks as a guide for grouping the ranks. For example, the English reader should be informed by the OPwiki that a Commodore is a Sho as well. And we will inform official translations as usual and literal translations as usual. For example, the English reader should be informed by the OPwiki that Oda prefers Japanese Army names of ranks for the enlisted ranks instead of Naval names. But I agree with you: we should give English names before the original ones, as usual, by the way. I put the original names first here because I want show clearly what was my point.Alelucas (talk) 16:26, October 25, 2013 (UTC)
Rank System according to Oda. Here is my adaptation of Oda's description of Marine organization. Note he grouped some ranks. I think we should follow his system. Note also he put the [Zengun] Sōsui but not the Gorosei. (There is another version of Oda's SBS explaining that here .)
・⦅World Government 世界政府 Sekai Seifu⦆ Supreme Commander 総帥 Sōsui（Greater than Marine 海軍よりえらい Kaigun Yori Erai）
|Marine 海軍 Kaigun|
|⦅Marine Commissioned Officer 海軍将校 Kaigun Shōkō⦆|
|・Fleet Commander 元帥 Gensui（Top of the Marine 海軍トップ Kaigun Toppu）|
|・Admiral 大将 Taishō （Governor－General 総督 Sōtoku ）|
・Vice-Admiral 中将 Chūshō
・Rear-Admiral 少将 Shōshō
・Commodore 准将 Junshō
・Captain 大佐 Taisa
・Commander 中佐 Chūsa
・Lt. Commander 少佐Shōsa
・Lieutenant Jr Grade 中尉 Chūi
・Ensign 少尉 Shōi
|・Quartermaster 准射 Juni|
・Sergeant Major 曹長 Sōchō
・Sergeant 軍曹 Gunsō
・Corporal 伍長 Gochō
・Private 1/c 一等兵 Ittōhei
・Private 2/c 二等兵 Nitōhei
・Private 3/c 三等兵 Santōhei （Recruit 新兵 Shinpei）
|・Chore Boy 雑用 Zatsuyō|
SeaTerror, it's exactly what I'm saying. I think I was not crystal clear here. But my point is that we are not following Oda's SBS explanation. The page needs some organization improvements, especially in rank-grouping. Please, could you re-read my talk?! Note that table of mine above is my SBS translation. And I has explained here using Ballantine's Grammar that Oda uses Japanese Army names of ranks for ranks below commisioned officers. Please, guys, don't be intransigent. Like you guys, I put a lot of work here. I believe I'm not talking bullshit.Alelucas (talk) 00:03, October 27, 2013 (UTC)
Was it? I know. I linked it. But it was an incomplete translation. I given a more complete one to our discussion. Did you read my talk carefully? If I can't work on this, say it, and say why, please. I don't understand you. Alelucas (talk) 21:31, October 27, 2013 (UTC)
Alelucas, can you please state the exact change you want to do, because I don't really get all the japanese you are posting. Example: Admiral--->General.
Hi, Vaz. Sotoku means Governor-General or Viceroy, somebody who governs a territory/colony. There is no relation with military rank 'General'. It's from SBS Vol. 8. See my translation above, not the OPwiki one, because that information was erased there.
The changes I suggest are to group some ranks as Oda explained in SBS and also used in SBS Vol. 24 (e.g. Ikan, Shokan) and to inform that Oda's using Marine Corps or Army names of ranks, despite our traditional Naval translations (e.g. Kaihei, not Suihei; Socho, Gunso, Gocho, not Itto, Nito, Santo Heiso; Ittohei, Nitohei, Santohei, not Itto, Nito, Santo Suihei). So I suggest we could give more info here, because there's more info. And we should discuss the Zengun thing. Marine (Kaigun) is placed within Zengun by Oda in SBS Vol 8. (Naturally, we discovered Kong is Zengun Sosui later.) And there's no page for Zengun. And Zengun isn't World Government, but a military organization of World Government. We know that, right?!Alelucas (talk) 19:06, October 28, 2013 (UTC)
Yes that was an example. Don't give me the japanese words. Give me the word we use now and the words you say we need to use from now on, for each rank that needs to be changed.
Please, see my previous talk. There I gave what I believe is a more precise contextual/equivalent translation (*) and what is our conventional contextual/equivalent translation (**). And I gave alternative names in my translation of SBS Volume 8's Marine System too. However, I believe we should use official, conventional, fansub English translation for the sake of the searchers, but I believe also we should inform more precise contextual/equivalent translation, for example saying Oda use Army or Marine Corps names of ranks, and we should inform literal translation as well. However, my point here is about the page's missing Rank Groups, that is, it's about page organization.Alelucas (talk) 19:44, October 28, 2013 (UTC)
Ok I think I got it now. Try contacting User: Klobis and ask him to get involved here. If he confirms these translations, then we got a case, and we can properly discuss on it further.
Thanks, Vaz. I hope you can take Klobis here. By the way, I already leave a message in his talk page, but no answer til now. I suggest we firstly resolve the rank-group [官 -kan] subject (maybe the Zengun one too) and secondly the (more exact equivalent) translation subject.Alelucas (talk) 20:04, October 28, 2013 (UTC)
Unnecessary and incorrect description of uniform. Edit
This my pet hate. Firstly, there is the Rank Insignia section on the page. This section clearly explains how there is no rank insignia per se, and futhermore no strict uniform policy within some ranks. Therefore there is absolutely no need to repeat the description of uniform on every single rank description. The Rank Insignia section is referecing SBS volume 8 and 24 which ODA personally explained the rank system and the uniforms worn by the members.
As for the incorrect description of uniform, if a certain editor solely and exclusively uses one character's uniform detail to represent the whole of their respective rank is undoubtedly wrong. In this incorrect manner, if the editor was to say "a CAPTAIN's coat has gold epaulette and two blue stripes on their cuffs" would be wrong. This is a specific description of Coby's coat. NOT the whole of the captain's rank. Examples proving this are captains like Sharinguru, Very good, Shu, just to name a few. As seen in the images below, there coats are all red and blue epaulette design. Therefore concluding that "A CAPTAIN"'s coat has the details of just Coby's coat is undoubtedly wrong.< They are all HQ Captains and they do not have coat's with "gold epaulettes" and "blue stripes on their cuffs". Therefore for a certain editor to repeatedly argue that since Coby is the most "obvious" example, that they should represent the whole of the Captain's rank is simply incorrect to say the least. And as mentioned before, Oda has explicitly explained that ranks do not have a set insignia, therefore eliminating the need to add description of uniform on each rank on the page.
The same can be said with the same certain editor arguing that a Lieutenant Commander has their own special type of coat with emblems on the chest pockets. This folly is again undoubtedly wrong as Lieutenant Commanders wear a regular Marine officer coat. To use just Helmeppo to represent the whole of his respective rank is again incorrect. Brannew was a Lieutenant Commander before timeskip. During the war, he donned a Marine coat which was a regular design, as seen below.The same logic has been applied of using just one specific character to define their whole rank's uniform is utterly and simply wrong, not to mention unnecessary.
In summary, with abundant proof provided, I have explained why the Marine Rank page should not have each specific uniform descriptions for each rank as it is unnecessary and incorrect anyway.
Ps. soz for the rant. This is my absolute pet hate.
I think Inc might have a point here, and I'm prepared to agree with him. Anyone else got a point of view?
Never forget the terrible events of July 8th 2014 16:45, January 16, 2014 (UTC)
Vice Admiral Page?Edit
I saw on the One Piece Reddit that a few users think that Vice Admirals should have their own page. I have to say, I think I agree with them, as Vice Admmirals have played a huge role in One Piece, even more than admirals sometimes. Thoughts?18:46, February 25, 2015 (UTC)
"Eyes gleamed" Yes! Yes! Give them their own page! Including each rank having their own pages! Ya "orgenized and no short pages cuz their weak!" Dudes.
Yeah there are enough of them and they play a large roll so we could give them a page HB 23:05, February 25, 2015 (UTC)
One thing that's confusing to me is the fact that pirate positions (like First Mate, Doctor, and even Sniper) have their own pages, so why don't Marine positions? I'm not saying I support all the Marine postions having their own page, but there should be a consistency of standards.23:08, February 25, 2015 (UTC)
I support this motion. Vice Admirals are everywhere in this story; pretty much every page I read mentions at least one, so I'd say they're deserving of their own page.--Xilinoc (talk) 23:19, February 25, 2015 (UTC)
I believe the reasons for merging all of the pages was that the ranks on their own were stubs. But VAs are so common, and they are so integrated into the story at this point, that I think a page for VAs is a great idea. No other ranks at this time though. Talk | 23:29, February 25, 2015 (UTC)
Big and spammy mistake Edit
Who decided that it was necessary to add all this spam?
There's everywhere how this and that was "former" this "former" that, without any evidence at all. Even on smoker. Smoker was directly promoted from captain, to vice admiral, wasn't he??
WHO said that kong was ever "promoted" to commander-and-chief, and WHO said that kong was EVER a fleet admiral? Same goes for so many characters! and these stupid spam isn't even consistent, it was just put randomly here and there by some idiot.
The page became a messy confusing bundle of characters that DID get promoted/demoted and speculations by some random guy who didn't put any reference.
That also goes for all the things on this page, there's barely any reference at all. Isn't this a good time to put some? 126.96.36.199 23:48, May 9, 2015 (UTC)
The page is indeed in dire need of references. But it's by far not the only page that needs that unfortunately.00:11, May 10, 2015 (UTC)
Smoker was promoted to commodore after Alabasta and Kong was a Fleet Admiral in Chapter 0. How about you give some actual examples of former ranks being listed "without any evidence at all"? Awaikage Talk 03:32, May 10, 2015 (UTC)
Never forget the terrible events of July 8th 2014 11:06, May 10, 2015 (UTC)
I think we should split the page to page per rank, similar to Admiral. Each rank deserves a page of its own, no matter how small they are. All the Dial-based weapons have their own pages now.04:42, June 26, 2015 (UTC)
That's fine for abundant ranks like vice admiral, but it's going to be pretty dull for less populated ranks like rear admiral and most of the lower footsoldier ranks. Also, I get the feeling the vague ones might get a little repetitive. Maybe if we split it into two sections, like high ranking and low ranking officers.04:46, June 26, 2015 (UTC)
Good idea, divide between the Marine Commissioned Officer (海軍将校 Kaigun Shōkō?), officially approved in SBS 8, and the below ranks. 05:02, June 26, 2015 (UTC)
I'd support if only to maintain a consistency of standards; every pirate rank has its own page so every Marine rank should have one too.05:03, June 26, 2015 (UTC)
The difference between pirate and marine ranks is that the pirates are a bit more evenly dispersed than the marines, making it easier to give each crew assignment its own article.05:37, June 26, 2015 (UTC)
I tried to do that long ago, you guys did not like it and preferred to merge it here. If you're going to do it, give it to the most populated ranks but the less populated should not. And no, I don't have a change of heart, just tired of all of these bloody arguments and you guys not wanting to accept my ideas. Also pirate ranks and ranks of an different groups should be covered up.
If we made a separate article for each rank then we'd be left with very short and stubby articles for a ton of ranks. The best idea is what DP said to do. I supported that idea before too. SeaTerror (talk) 07:47, June 26, 2015 (UTC)
One of the big problems with making several pages is that we know little of the duties of the individual ranks. Can you really tell me that we know enough about what Rear Admirals do to say more than who some RAs were, and how the rank relates to others?
I'm not totally opposed to the idea of making new pages, but making them for every rank (or every rank above a certain level) seems like a bad idea if we don't know more about each rank than what's stated here already.
One thing I am opposed to is removing or altering this page. Just add a link to the "main article" like we do for Admirals and leave this page alone. Talk | 17:33, June 27, 2015 (UTC)
Not that I'm taking this side, but I'm wondering. Could ranks just be merged to the Marine's page?
I am definitely opposed to making seperate pages. There's no sense of collective action between Captains. It's not like all the captains travel together and make group decisions. 02:53, July 4, 2015 (UTC)
I agree with JSD on keeping this page the same. If nothing else, I think "Captain" should get its own page due to the significant number of Captains and what we know about their duties. Awaikage Talk 02:38, July 6, 2015 (UTC)
I concur. Admirals and Captains are the ranks we have the most information on in terms of responsibilities and such. They should be the only ones with separate pages.--The Will of Deez (talk) 02:44, July 6, 2015 (UTC)
Actually to say, there are many articles here that are more or less stubby. Mainly from here. 01:25, July 10, 2015 (UTC)
Bump.01:41, July 11, 2015 (UTC)
If there's enough for both pages. I support the idea.00:25, July 13, 2015 (UTC)
I'm down with a Captain page. Talk | 00:28, July 13, 2015 (UTC)
Captain, there's plenty of them to make it its own page. What about the others? As long as at least one person holds/held the rank, we make a page for it?03:36, July 17, 2015 (UTC)
I support Yata with the creation of captain. But making pages for individual ranks... I need to agree with JSD. Anything outside VA, admiral and captain does not deserve it.14:14, 7 18, 2015 (UTC)
Clear Majority, we'll make a page for Marine Captains. Who wants to be anything but lazy and create it? Talk | 14:17, July 18, 2015 (UTC)
Since Vergo is seen as a cadet in the Marines, whether or not he was in G-5 14 or 13 years ago, shouldn't he be listed as a former one?--844996 15:49, August 7, 2015 (UTC)
Isn't he already listed as former?16:11, August 7, 2015 (UTC)
- Nope, he isn't listed as a former one. Should I add him there?--844996 13:03, August 9, 2015 (UTC)
Did we get a confirmation of his rank though? Talk | 13:47, August 9, 2015 (UTC)