• This forum is strictly intended to be used by members of the VS Battles wiki. Please only register if you have an autoconfirmed account there, as otherwise your registration will be rejected. If you have already registered once, do not do so again, and contact Antvasima if you encounter any problems.

    For instructions regarding the exact procedure to sign up to this forum, please click here.
  • We need Patreon donations for this forum to have all of its running costs financially secured.

    Community members who help us out will receive badges that give them several different benefits, including the removal of all advertisements in this forum, but donations from non-members are also extremely appreciated.

    Please click here for further information, or here to directly visit our Patreon donations page.
  • Please click here for information about a large petition to help children in need.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Haki page and references are done.
Finally they're done.

Before we add those, we need to talk about if we're revising the Notable Attacks and Techniques section.

Should it even have Haki in there? Haki has been greatly explained on the wiki page. Haki doesn't have notable techniques or anything, it's just it's basic usages and such

I suggest we remove all Haki from the notable attacks and techniques sections, and the only thing on the profiles about Haki would be the category and these
On profiles, each and every one will be revised into this format

"(Insert Proficiency) Kenbunshoku, (Insert Proficiency) Busoshoku, (Insert Proficiency) Haoshoku"

If it is missing one
"(Insert Proficiency) Kenbunshoku, (Insert Proficiency) Busoshoku"
"(Insert Proficiency) Kenbunshoku, (Insert Proficiency) Haoshoku"
"(Insert Proficiency) Busoshoku, (Insert Proficiency) Haoshoku"
 
Haki page and references are done.
Finally they're done.

Before we add those, we need to talk about if we're revising the Notable Attacks and Techniques section.

Should it even have Haki in there? Haki has been greatly explained on the wiki page. Haki doesn't have notable techniques or anything, it's just it's basic usages and such

I suggest we remove all Haki from the notable attacks and techniques sections, and the only thing on the profiles about Haki would be the category and these
Maybe just notable attacks that includes haki? like ryuo(ryou) forgot how it spelled
 
Should it even have Haki in there? Haki has been greatly explained on the wiki page. Haki doesn't have notable techniques or anything, it's just it's basic usages and such

I suggest we remove all Haki from the notable attacks and techniques sections, and the only thing on the profiles about Haki would be the category and these
I can agree with this, I don’t really think it’s necessary to have haki explained in notable attacks
 
that isn't a notable attack either, it's just another stage (technically Ryuo is just another name for Buso but I won't get into that here) which is already well defined on the page
My bad watching it again after a long time but well if you say so it's fine i guess
 
I suggest we remove all Haki from the notable attacks and techniques sections, and the only thing on the profiles about Haki would be the category and these
I agree considering most are either empty or are just copy and pasted from the haki page itself. Although realising this it's probably best to add a Goken description to the haki page instead since it's only described on the haki Notable attacks/techniques section.
 
Haki page and references are done.
Finally they're done.

Before we add those, we need to talk about if we're revising the Notable Attacks and Techniques section.

Should it even have Haki in there? Haki has been greatly explained on the wiki page. Haki doesn't have notable techniques or anything, it's just it's basic usages and such

I suggest we remove all Haki from the notable attacks and techniques sections, and the only thing on the profiles about Haki would be the category and these
Yeah it makes sense to remove Haki from the notable techniques part.
 
I don't think that Haki should be removed from the Notable Attacks sections. We don't need full descriptions on exactly what each type is, but we could at least list character's individual Haki feats there.

With references preferably.

For most characters the section would be quite small or unnecessary if a character has minimal feats, but Haki is still a very "notable technique."
 
I don't think that Haki should be removed from the Notable Attacks sections. We don't need full descriptions on exactly what each type is, but we could at least list character's individual Haki feats there.

With references preferably.

For most characters the section would be quite small or unnecessary if a character has minimal feats, but Haki is still a very "notable technique."
This seems to make sense to me.
Also this can be added now

For the topic of notable attacks, me and Damage talked about it offsite
What did you decide?
 
Since Luffy could use Haoshoku Haki even while unconscious in Chapter 924, would that grants Haoshoku Haki Instinctive Reaction
 
Updating profiles (I need time to do that), adding the new updated Haki page (specifically only tabbers) to replace the page, and that's it for now other than this
Basically (correct me if i'm wrong) we're planning on adding Haki in the NA&T section for those who have feats with each specific color of haki, and those without feats don't get it put in the section
 
Just a thought but is Kenbunshoku and Busoshoku really better to use on the profiles than Observation and Armament?

Generally speaking I think we should be using the English translations where we can, especially for terminology like this where we want to make it clear to anyone visiting the pages who may not know One Piece well.
 
Just a thought but is Kenbunshoku and Busoshoku really better to use on the profiles than Observation and Armament?

Generally speaking I think we should be using the English translations where we can, especially for terminology like this where we want to make it clear to anyone visiting the pages who may not know One Piece well.
I disagree, the One Piece wiki does the same thing and doesn't seem to suffer from that problem. If needed something like "(also known as armament haki)" could appear on the profiles in the Notable Attacks/techniques section.

An issue I've noticed with using the English is it takes more space on the profile; saying Armament Haki compared to just Busoshoku while not a major difference does get tedious if a profile's statistics mentions it a bunch of times.
 
I disagree, the One Piece wiki does the same thing and doesn't seem to suffer from that problem.

We're not the OP Wiki, and countless other wikis also use mostly English terminolgy if we're getting into that.

I think it makes more sense for us, an English speaking wiki, to preferably use the English terminology where we can.

That doesn't mean neglecting to mention the original Japanese names at all, just that on profiles the English version would take priority.

An issue I've noticed with using the English is it takes more space on the profile; saying Armament Haki compared to just Busoshoku while not a major difference does get tedious if a profile's statistics mentions it a bunch of times.

Actually the difference would be changing "Busoshoku" to "Armament". It's actually 1 less letter.
 
Actually the difference would be changing "Busoshoku" to "Armament". It's actually 1 less letter.
Thought of that, but then it creates confusion as Armament and Observation are regular words on their own with their own meanings besides haki.

Using Busoshoku or Kenbunshoku doesn't have that issues and makes it easier to look up and be certain on what it's referring too.

Plus for the sake of space like mentioned on the page currently Busoshoku, Kenbunshoku and Haoshoku are also abbreviated to Buso, Kenbun and Hao.
 
We're not the OP Wiki
Didn't claim we were, but regardless they use the Japanese for the terminology and don't seem to suffer the problems you're mentioning.

And if someone knows nothing of One Piece what difference does it make if their first time reading up on the pages is Armament Haki or Busoshoku.
 
Didn't claim we were, but regardless they use the Japanese for the terminology and don't seem to suffer the problems you're mentioning.

Well, the OP wiki actually uses "Busoshoku Haki" instead of just "Busoshoku" like you're suggesting.

But I'm not a fan of the OP wiki's naming scheme anyway.

Plus for the sake of space like mentioned on the page currently Busoshoku, Kenbunshoku and Haoshoku are also abbreviated to Buso, Kenbun and Hao.

We're not so limited in space that we need to abbreviate these Japanese terms even further.

Thought of that, but then it creates confusion as Armament and Observation are regular words on their own with their own meanings besides haki.

Not when they're capitalized.
 
We're not so limited in space that we need to abbreviate these Japanese terms even further.
I never said it was a case of limited space. The issue is that many profiles are insanely bloated and hard to read, Luffy for example due to all his gears has this issue despite only having three keys currently (which is inevitably going to increase), it's better to save space where you can to solve this issue.
Well, the OP wiki actually uses "Busoshoku Haki" instead of just "Busoshoku" like you're suggesting
As the page's name, but you'll notice throughout the page they'll just refer it to Busoshoku.
 
As the page's name, but you'll notice throughout the page they'll just refer it to Busoshoku.
I meant on other character's pages.

Either way, that's no different to us using "Armament" or "Observation" which when capitalized is referring to a proper term and not the generic word.
 
Either way, that's no different to us using "Armament" or "Observation" which when capitalized is referring to a proper term and not the generic word.
You're right, but I still prefer the Japanese terms as they can be abbreviated further in the stats section.
 
Just a thought but is Kenbunshoku and Busoshoku really better to use on the profiles than Observation and Armament?
Using the original is better in this scenario, as it's cleaner
Generally speaking I think we should be using the English translations where we can, especially for terminology like this where we want to make it clear to anyone visiting the pages who may not know One Piece well.
That's what we have the Haki page for, to define those terms for those who may not understand
 
How about simply writing "Busoshoku/Armament Haki" at the start of that section, for example?
 
How about simply writing "Busoshoku/Armament Haki" at the start of that section, for example?
It's moreso for the Powers & Abilities section I'm thinking of.

Right now for Kaido for example, we have:

Haki (Advanced Haoshoku, Advanced Kenbunshoku, Advanced Busoshoku)

I'm wondering if using the English terminology would be better.

Haki (Advanced Conqueror's Haki, Advanced Observation Haki, Advanced Armament Haki)

It's not as condensed, but it's instantly a lot clearer as to the types of Haki than having to look them up.
 
I see. Thank you for the explanation. I agree with your reasoning.

The Haki explanation page would likely benefit from my suggestion though.
 
Why's this an issue? Bleach's terminology section has the original names, then adds the english literal translation as well. Just leave it the same for OP? The original names roll off the tongue easier anyway.
 
Why's this an issue? Bleach's terminology section has the original names, then adds the english literal translation as well. Just leave it the same for OP? The original names roll off the tongue easier anyway.

Many Bleach terms aren't translated in the English version, like Bankai is kept as "Bankai" even in the official release.

Whereas Busoshoku has an actual translation to English.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top