Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/One Piece Games


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.  

The result was Keep all. SynergeticMaggot 13:38, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

One Piece Games
Non-notable game company (684 Ghits), active only in Japan and occasionally in Europe according to article, yet has a massive template (populated entirely by similarly deletable articles). I propose that every article in the template be deleted, including the template itself, with all meaningful content moved to One Piece. A single series doesn't need 50+ empty pages. RandyWang ( raves/review me! ) 11:05, 27 July 2006 (UTC)


 * The template I'm referring to is Template:One Piece general.


 * I'll be adding a list of specific pages to delete as soon as I can compile one (10-20 minutes, I guess). Since nominating, I can see a couple that may need to remain. RandyWang ( raves/review me! ) 11:08, 27 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Specific pages to delete:
 * One Piece filler characters - We need an article detailing over 100 filler characters?
 * One Piece minor characters - Ditto. This was 122kb of cruft.
 * List of One Piece bounties - Surely this could all be placed in One Piece, assuming any of it matters?
 * One Piece abilities - Totally unnecessary listcruft.
 * Every article in the Pirate Crews section: we already have a "list of them.
 * One Piece anime adaptions and One Piece manga adaptions - shouldn't these be in One Piece?


 * .. and so on. There are so many, this will take a while, but these are the biggest problems I can see. In general, many of the articles in this template are totally unnecessary (WP:NOT an indiscriminate collection of information). RandyWang ( raves/review me! ) 11:28, 27 July 2006 (UTC)


 * The following was moved from the in-line AfD tag at One Piece minor characters. RandyWang ( raves/review me! ) 12:48, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep [reason] We need a reference guide to smaller characters. As a on going show, we get many rumours and speculations posted on One Piece related pages.  For that reason pages such as this are needed purly to resolve such debates.  Also, most of these characters have play extremely important roles or are generally important things to the series.  If this page is deleted a lot of important information would be lost.  These characters also don't warrent their own pages because they don't have enough imformation for them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Angel Emfrbl (talk • contribs) 12:33 2006-07-27


 * Keep Notable developer of popular games, popular enough to have spawned several sequels and be translated into other languages. They have had activity in America (see One Piece Grand Battle!) but being Asia-and-Europe-based would not be a reason to delete even if it was true.  As for the other articles, Keep unless relisted seperately, they're different enough that we should consider each on its own merits.  Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  13:10, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. Google hits is probably not a valid method of checking notability for a Japanese company, as the vast majority of references to that company will be (surprise) in Japanese.   D a r k S h i k a r i   13:18, 27 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep One Piece bounties page- There is too much bits of imformation on this page for the One Piece main page. To place all this on that one page would clog it up or create confusion.  It is here to act as a reference, it also helps conpare rumours and speculations since this is related to an on going show. This page collects together the information for debates, comparisons and quick referecing.  Its uselfulness was proven today when I correct correct several One Piece pages because a someone came in and altered them, this included Mihawks, Luffy's, Zoro, Shanks, Portgas D. Ace.  In short, its there to hault rumours and speculations and save a whole lot of trouble. Angel Emfrbl 13:53, 27 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep Both the Manga adaptions and the Anime adaptions pages were orginally one with the One Piece Main page. What we found is that it cause confusion and inconsitancey with other parts of the article.  When we seperated the information it allowed us to clean up the One Piece main page and gave each section a chance to grow on its on without repeated information or inconsistacies.  Also, this page is fairly new and as such has not been completed yet.  At least it needs a couple more weeks to bring it up to scratch with wikipedias standards.  Angel Emfrbl 13:53, 27 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep One Piece Template. Size wise, we are actually trying to strink that, it is work in progress and discussion has been on going.  Half the trouble is tha the series itself, One Piece, is the most populaur anime in Japan and therefore has a lot of information in general, much of it important to the storyline and worth noting on the One Piece pages.  We haven't finished with the template, we need a few weeks to sort it out. Angel Emfrbl 14:03, 27 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep The One Piece crews being listed, that has only just been created as such and while has a list of crew and information doesn't provide much information on roles and importantce of the crews themselves. The individual Pirate Crew pages list the roles they've played, as well as information that cannot be summed up in a few short sentances.  Another reason for them being the way they are is that there are so many (One Piece is afterall a show on PIRATES) that there is a lot of different crews.  To put it plainly, you can't sum up EVERYTHING on the pirate crews in one list like on that page without loosing a lot of information important to the series.  Angel Emfrbl 14:01, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep- This is a world encyclopedia, not a US one. Just because they're bigger in Japan and EU than here is no reason to delete. --PresN 17:56, 27 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep, there are plenty of game companies that are only very active in a certain area. For example, there are numerous ones only active in the US and/or Europe (Microsoft's console games are not popular in Japan at all) but that does not make them any less notable. At any rate, certainly keep the template, but it looks like there's a lot of cleaning up to do around there. syphonbyte (t 18:15, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletions.   -- TheFarix (Talk) 18:20, 27 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep - Everything you listed for deletion is a valid compendium of information for this series. Regardless of what you think about the amount of pages and detailed information, the fact of the matter is that the One Piece franchise has alot of details in its plot, characters, and general information overall. All of these pages are usefull for compiling information on the anime series, manga, video games, etc. --Lordshmeckie 18:47, 27 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep, I like to know exactly which part of the 11 categories of "indiscriminate knowledge" in WP:NOT does these pages fall under and how are these pages not covered by WP:FICT? There has been a awful lot of fiction related articles being put up for AfD recently using the claim "Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information" as the sole reason even though the article doesn't fall under any of the 11 categories of "indiscriminate knowledge" and are permitted by the WP:FICT notability guidelines. --TheFarix (Talk) 19:28, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep Would you rather have over 100 separate articles detailing filler characters? Danny Lilithborne 19:29, 27 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep most as a textbook example of a series where WP:FICT has actually been followed. The standard process when faced with minor-characters type articles that are clogged up with fancruft should be to edit them to cut out needless cruft while retaining the character listings, synopses, etc. that are generally accepted as suitably encyclopedic. Article deletion is rarely required for cases such as these. &mdash; Haeleth Talk 20:09, 27 July 2006 (UTC)


 * You'd better keep it!!!! -- —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.110.193.157 (talk • contribs).


 * It's a keeper WP:FICTION followed, articles are all nicely kept together in one page. There may be some room for merging here and there, but I won't push it.  If you find cruft in the articles, you can always edit them. I view these long pages as overflow from the main articles. This is an extraordinarily popular, highly rated, and legnthy series in Japan.  Who can't help but love Mayumi Tanaka?   Now, there were some copy-and-pasted episode summaries for this series that could be removed. (Unless someone cleaned them up..) I could find them for you and you can AfD those if you'd like. --Kunzite 02:06, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

"Non-notable minor characters (and places, concepts, etc.) in a work of fiction should be merged with short descriptions into a "List of characters." This list should reside in the article relating to the work itself, unless either becomes long, in which case a separate article for the list is good practice. The list(s) should contain all characters, races, places, etc. from the work of fiction, with links to those that have their own articles." Sigmasonic X 06:46, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep - I may be wrong, but judging from your initial comments, you, good sir, seem to be under the assumption that One Piece is primarily a game series, while it is in fact an anime/manga series. Since Naruto et al gets to keep its attack lists and such (like this, for instance), One Piece should keep its own. Concerning the minor and filler characters--would you prefer if we made individual articles for each one? To quote the WP:FICTION article:


 * Keep, nominated article is good enough and this is an overbroad nom... if necessary relist the other cruft separately. Games seem notable enough even if they're only for Japanese market. One Piece manga etc. itself is definitely notable (as in "someone thought it'd wise to get this thing marketed in this cold and distant country of mine, and now all the kids love it"), and the template seems justified. --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 09:39, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep One Piece Games is not a game company, it's just the title of an article that lists games made about the One Piece franchise. The nominated articles are different enough to require separate AfDs, but I think I would say keep for each one since they are non-redundant lists that fall under WP:FICT. - Wickning1 15:00, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. I believe that if you have a problem with the number of significant minor characters in One Piece, the person to talk to would be Eiichiro Oda. A large number of those articles do need cleaned up though. --tjstrf 01:16, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep all -- —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 200.56.149.121 (talk • contribs).


 * I've already voted, but I'd just like to note that with a new suggestion I made, if agreed upon, both the "One Piece minor characters" section will shrink greatly and the Pirate Crew articles will become much more helpful, addressing two of your concerns. It can be seen in the discussion sections for the One Piece main article and the discussion section for One Piece minor characters. Sigmasonic X 16:30, 30 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep. No reason to delete this. Xihr 04:05, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.