text:
One Piece

One Piece (stylized in all caps) is a Japanese manga series written and illustrated by Eiichiro Oda. It has been serialized in Shueisha's shōnen manga magazine Weekly Shōnen Jump since July 1997, with its individual chapters compiled in 109 tankōbon volumes. The story follows the adventures of Monkey D. Luffy and his crew, the Straw Hat Pirates, where he explores the Grand Line in search of the mythical treasure known as the "One Piece" in order to become the next King of the Pirates.

The manga spawned a media franchise, having been adapted into a festival film by Production I.G, and an anime series by Toei Animation, which began broadcasting in 1999. Additionally, Toei has developed fourteen animated feature films, one original video animation, and thirteen television specials. Several companies have developed various types of merchandising and media, such as a trading card game and numerous video games. The manga series was licensed for an English language release in North America and the United Kingdom by Viz Media and in Australia by Madman Entertainment. The anime series was licensed by 4Kids Entertainment for an English-language release in North America in 2004 before the license was dropped and subsequently acquired by Funimation in 2007.

One Piece has received praise for its storytelling, world-building, art, characterization, and humor. It has received many awards and is ranked by critics, reviewers, and readers as one of the best manga of all time. By August 2022, it had over 516.6 million copies in circulation in 61 countries and regions worldwide, making it the best-selling manga series in history, and the best-selling comic series printed in book volume. Several volumes of the manga have broken publishing records, including the highest initial print run of any book in Japan. In 2015 and 2022, One Piece set the Guinness World Record for "the most copies published for the same comic book series by a single author". It was the best-selling manga for eleven consecutive years from 2008 to 2018, and is the only manga that had an initial print of volumes of above 3 million continuously for more than 10 years, as well as the only that had achieved more than 1 million copies sold in all of its over 100 published tankōbon volumes. One Piece is the only manga whose volumes have ranked first every year in Oricon's weekly comic chart existence since 2008.

Setting
The world of One Piece is populated by humans and other races such as dwarves (more akin to faeries in size), giants, merfolk, fish-men, long-limbed tribes, long-necked people known as the Snakeneck Tribe, and animal people (known as "Minks"). The world is governed by an intercontinental organization known as the World Government, consisting of dozens of member countries. The Navy is the sea military branch of the World Government that protects the known seas from pirates and other criminals. There is also Cipher Pol which is a group of agencies within the World Government that are their secret police. While pirates are major opponents against the Government, the ones who really challenge their rule are the Revolutionary Army who seeks to overthrow them. The central tension of the series pits the World Government and their forces against pirates. The series regularly emphasizes moral ambiguity over the label "pirate", which includes cruel villains, but also any individuals that do not submit to the World Government's authoritarian—and often morally ambiguous—rule. The One Piece world also has supernormal characteristics like Devil Fruits, which are mysterious fruits that grant whoever eats them transformative powers. Another supernatural power is Haki, which grants its users enhanced willpower, observation, and fighting abilities, and it is one of the only effective methods of inflicting bodily harm on certain Devil Fruit users.

The world itself consists of two vast oceans divided by a massive mountain range called the Red Line. Within the oceans is a second global phenomenon known as the Grand Line, which is a sea that runs perpendicular to the Red Line and is bounded by the Calm Belt, strips of calm ocean infested with huge ship-eating monsters known as Sea Kings. These geographical barriers divide the world into four seas: North Blue, East Blue, West Blue, and South Blue. Passage between the four seas, and the Grand Line, is therefore difficult. Unique and mystical features enable transport between the seas, such as the use of Sea Prism Stone employed by government ships to mask their presence as they traverse the Calm Belt, or the Reverse Mountain where water from the four seas flows uphill before merging into a rapidly flowing and dangerous canal that enters the Grand Line. The Grand Line itself is split into two separate halves with the Red Line between being Paradise and the New World.

Premise
The series focuses on Monkey D. Luffy—a young man made of rubber after unintentionally eating a Devil Fruit—who sets off on a journey from the East Blue Sea to find the deceased King of the Pirates Gol D. Roger's ultimate treasure known as the "One Piece", and take over his prior title. In an effort to organize his own crew, the Straw Hat Pirates, Luffy rescues and befriends a pirate hunter and swordsman named Roronoa Zoro, and they head off in search of the titular treasure. They are joined in their journey by Nami, a money-obsessed thief and navigator; Usopp, a sniper and compulsive liar; and Sanji, an amorous but chivalrous cook. They acquire a ship, the Going Merry—later replaced by the Thousand Sunny—and engage in confrontations with notorious pirates. As Luffy and his crew set out on their adventures, others join the crew later in the series, including Tony Tony Chopper, an anthropomorphized reindeer doctor; Nico Robin, an archaeologist and former Baroque Works assassin; Franky, a cyborg shipwright; Brook, a skeleton musician and swordsman; and Jimbei, a whale shark-type fish-man and former member of the Seven Warlords of the Sea who becomes their helmsman. Together, they encounter other pirates, bounty hunters, criminal organizations, revolutionaries, secret agents, different types of scientists, soldiers of the morally-ambiguous World Government, and various other friends and foes, as they sail the seas in pursuit of their dreams.

Concept and creation
Eiichiro Oda's interest in pirates began in his childhood, watching the animated series Vicky the Viking, which inspired him to want to draw a manga series about pirates. The reading of pirate biographies influenced Oda to incorporate the characteristics of real-life pirates into many of the characters in One Piece; for example, the character Marshall D. Teach is based on and named after the historical pirate Edward "Blackbeard" Teach. Apart from the history of piracy, Oda's biggest influence is Akira Toriyama and his series Dragon Ball, which is one of his favorite manga.

While working as an assistant to Nobuhiro Watsuki, Oda began writing One Piece in 1996. It started as two one-shot stories entitled Romance Dawn —which would later be used as the title for One Piece's first chapter and volume. They both featured the character of Luffy, and included elements that would appear later in the main series. The first of these short stories was published in August 1996 in Akamaru Jump, and reprinted in 2002 in One Piece Red guidebook. The second was published in the 41st issue of Weekly Shōnen Jump in 1996, and reprinted in 1998 in Oda's short story collection, Wanted! In an interview with TBS, Takanori Asada, the original editor of One Piece, revealed that the manga was rejected by Weekly Shōnen Jump three times before Shueisha agreed to publish the series.

Development
Oda's primary inspiration for the concept of Devil Fruits was Doraemon; the Fruits' abilities and uses reflect Oda's daily life and his personal fantasies, similar to that of Doraemon's gadgets, such as the Gum-Gum Fruit being inspired by Oda's laziness. When designing the outward appearance of Devil Fruits Oda thinks of something that would fulfill a human desire; he added that he does not see why he would draw a Devil Fruit unless the fruit's appearance would entice one to eat it. The names of many special attacks, as well as other concepts in the manga, consist of a form of punning in which phrases written in kanji are paired with an idiosyncratic reading. The names of some characters' techniques are often mixed with other languages, and the names of several of Zoro's sword techniques are designed as jokes; they look fearsome when read by sight but sound like kinds of food when read aloud. For example, Zoro's signature move is Onigiri, which is written as demon cut but is pronounced the same as rice ball in Japanese. Eisaku Inoue, the animation director, has said that the creators did not use these kanji readings in the anime since they "might have cut down the laughs by about half". Nevertheless, Konosuke Uda, the director, said that he believes that the creators "made the anime pretty close to the manga".

Oda was "sensitive" about how his work would be translated. In many instances, the English version of the One Piece manga uses one onomatopoeia for multiple onomatopoeia used in the Japanese version. For instance, "saaa" (the sound of light rain, close to a mist) and "zaaa" (the sound of pouring rain) are both translated as "fshhhhhhh". Unlike other manga artists, Oda draws everything that moves himself to create a consistent look while leaving his staff to draw the backgrounds based on sketches he has drawn. This workload forces him to keep tight production rates, starting from five in the morning until two in the morning the next day, with short breaks only for meals. Oda's work program includes the first three days of the week dedicated to the writing of the storyboard and the remaining time for the definitive inking of the boards and for the possible coloring. When a reader asked who Nami was in love with, Oda replied that there would hardly be any love affairs within Luffy's crew. The author also explained he deliberately avoids including them in One Piece since the series is a shōnen manga and the boys who read it are not interested in love stories.

Conclusion
Oda revealed that he originally planned One Piece to last five years, and that he had already planned the ending. However, he found it would take longer than he had expected as Oda realized that he liked the story too much to end it in that period of time. In 2016, nineteen years after the start of serialization, the author said that the manga has reached 65% of the story he intends to tell. In July 2018, on the occasion of the twenty-first anniversary of One Piece, Oda said that the manga has reached 80% of the plot. while in January 2019, he said that One Piece is on its way to the conclusion, but that it could exceed the 100th volume. In a television special aired in Japan in January 2019, Oda said that One Piece is on its way to the conclusion, but that it would exceed the 100th volume, also commenting that he would be willing to change the ending if the fans were to be able to predict it. When asked if the titular treasure is "family bonds", Oda replied: "No, I hate that kind of thing", mentioning the ending of The Wizard of Oz and claiming that he does not endure stories where the reward of adventure is the adventure itself, opting for a story where travel is important, but even more important is the goal. In August 2019, Oda said that, according to his predictions, the manga would end in five years. However, Oda stated that the ending would be what he had decided in the beginning; he is committed to seeing it through. In August 2020, Shueisha announced in the year's 35th issue of Weekly Shōnen Jump that One Piece was "headed toward the upcoming final saga." On January 4, 2021, One Piece reached its thousandth chapter. In June 2022, Oda announced that the manga would enter a one-month break to prepare for its 25th anniversary and its final saga, set to begin with the release of chapter 1054.

Manga
Written and illustrated by Eiichiro Oda, One Piece has been serialized by Shueisha in the shōnen manga anthology Weekly Shōnen Jump since July 22, 1997. Shueisha has collected its chapters into individual tankōbon volumes. The first volume was released on December 24, 1997. By July 4, 2024, a total of 109 volumes have been released.

The first English translation of One Piece was released by Viz Media in November 2002, who published its chapters in the manga anthology Shonen Jump, and later collected in volumes since June 30, 2003. In 2009, Viz announced the release of five volumes per month during the first half of 2010 to catch up with the serialization in Japan. Following the discontinuation of the print Shonen Jump, Viz began releasing One Piece chapterwise in its digital successor Weekly Shonen Jump on January 30, 2012. Following the digital Weekly Shonen Jump's cancelation in December 2018, Viz Media started simultaneously publishing One Piece through its Shonen Jump service, and by Shueisha through Manga Plus, in January 2019.

In the United Kingdom, the volumes were published by Gollancz Manga, starting in March 2006, until Viz Media took it over after the fourteenth volume. In Australia and New Zealand, the English volumes have been distributed by Madman Entertainment since November 10, 2008. In Poland, Japonica Polonica Fantastica is publishing the manga, Glénat in France, Panini Comics in Mexico, LARP Editores and later by Ivrea in Argentina, Planeta de Libros in Spain, Edizioni Star Comics in Italy, and Sangatsu Manga in Finland.

Spin-offs and crossovers
Oda teamed up with Akira Toriyama to create a single crossover of One Piece and Toriyama's Dragon Ball. Entitled Cross Epoch, the one-shot was published in the December 25, 2006, issue of Weekly Shōnen Jump and the April 2011 issue of the English Shonen Jump. Oda collaborated with Mitsutoshi Shimabukuro, author of Toriko, for a crossover one-shot of their series titled Taste of the Devil Fruit (実食! 悪魔の実!!), which ran in the April 4, 2011, issue of Weekly Shōnen Jump. The spin-off series One Piece Party (ワンピースパーティー), written by Ei Andō in a super deformed art style, began serialization in the January 2015 issue of Saikyō Jump. Its final chapter was published on Shōnen Jump+ on February 2, 2021.

Festival films and original video animation
''One Piece: Defeat Him! The Pirate Ganzack!'' was produced by Production I.G for the 1998 Jump Super Anime Tour and was directed by Gorō Taniguchi. Luffy, Nami, and Zoro are attacked by a sea monster that destroys their boat and separates them. Luffy is found on an island beach, where he saves a little girl, Medaka, from two pirates. All the villagers, including Medaka's father have been abducted by Ganzack and his crew and forced into labor. After hearing that Ganzack also stole all the food, Luffy and Zoro rush out to retrieve it. As they fight the pirates, one of them kidnaps Medaka. A fight starts between Luffy and Ganzack, ending with Luffy's capture. Meanwhile, Zoro is forced to give up after a threat is made to kill all the villagers. They rise up against Ganzack, and while the islanders and pirates fight, Nami unlocks the three captives. Ganzack defeats the rebellion and reveals his armored battleship. The Straw Hat Pirates are forced to fight Ganzack once more to prevent him from destroying the island.

A second film, One Piece: Romance Dawn Story, was produced by Toei Animation in July 2008 for the Jump Super Anime Tour. It is 34 minutes in length and based on the first version of Romance Dawn. It includes the Straw Hat Pirates up to Brook and their second ship, the Thousand Sunny. In search for food for his crew, Luffy arrives at a port after defeating a pirate named Crescent Moon Gally on the way. There he meets a girl named Silk, who was abandoned by attacking pirates as a baby and raised by the mayor. Her upbringing causes her to value the town as her "treasure". The villagers mistake Luffy for Gally and capture him just as the real Gally returns. Gally throws Luffy in the water and plans to destroy the town, but Silk saves him and Luffy pursues Gally. His crew arrives to help him, and with their help he recovers the treasure for the town, acquires food, and destroys Gally's ship. The film was later released as a triple feature DVD with Dragon Ball: Yo! Son Goku and His Friends Return!! and Tegami Bachi: Light and Blue Night, that was available only though a mail-in offer exclusively to Japanese residents.

The One Piece Film Strong World: Episode 0 original video animation adapts the manga's special "Chapter 0", which shows how things were before and after the death of Roger. It received a limited release of three thousand DVDs as a collaboration with the House Foods brand.

1999 TV series
An anime television series adaptation produced by Toei Animation premiered on Fuji Television on October 20, 1999; the series reached its 1,000th episode in November 2021.

Upcoming TV series
In December 2023 at the Jump Festa '24 event, it was announced that Wit Studio would be producing an anime series remake for Netflix, restarting from the East Blue story arc, to commemorate the 25th anniversary of the original anime series. The remake will be titled The One Piece.

Theatrical films
Fourteen animated theatrical films based on the One Piece series have been released. The films are typically released in March to coincide with the spring vacation of Japanese schools. The films feature self-contained, completely original plots, or alternate retellings of story arcs with animation of a higher quality than what the weekly anime allows. The first three films were typically double features paired up with other anime films, and were thus usually an hour or less in length. The films themselves offer contradictions in both chronology and design that make them incompatible with a single continuity. Funimation has licensed the eighth, tenth, and twelfth films for release in North America, and these films have received in-house dubs by the company.

Live-action series
On July 21, 2017, Weekly Shōnen Jump editor-in-chief Hiroyuki Nakano announced that Tomorrow Studios (a partnership between Marty Adelstein and ITV Studios) and Shueisha would commence production of an American live-action television adaptation of Eiichiro Oda's One Piece manga series as part of the series' 20th anniversary celebrations. Eiichiro Oda served as executive producer for the series alongside Tomorrow Studios CEO Adelstein and Becky Clements. The series would reportedly begin with the East Blue arc.

In January 2020, Oda revealed that Netflix ordered a first season consisting of ten episodes. On May 19, 2020, producer Marty Adelstein revealed during an interview with SyFy Wire, that the series was originally set to begin filming in Cape Town sometime around August, but has since been delayed to around September due to COVID-19. He also revealed that, during the same interview, all ten scripts had been written for the series and they were set to begin casting sometime in June. However, executive producer Matt Owens stated in September 2020 that casting had not yet commenced. On September 15, 2023, Oda revealed that the show has been renewed for the second season.

In March 2021, production started up again with showrunner Steven Maeda revealing that the series codename is Project Roger. In November 2021, it was announced that the casting for the series includes Iñaki Godoy as Monkey D. Luffy, Mackenyu as Roronoa Zoro, Emily Rudd as Nami, Jacob Romero Gibson as Usopp and Taz Skylar as Sanji. In March 2022, Netflix added Morgan Davies as Koby, Ilia Isorelýs Paulino as Alvida, Aidan Scott as Helmeppo, Jeff Ward as Buggy, McKinley Belcher III as Arlong, Vincent Regan as Garp and Peter Gadiot as Shanks to the cast in recurring roles.

Video games
The One Piece franchise has been adapted into multiple video games published by subsidiaries of Bandai and later as part of Bandai Namco Entertainment. The games have been released on a variety of video game, handheld consoles, and mobile devices. The video games feature role-playing games, and fighting games, such as the titles of the Grand Battle! meta-series. The series debuted on July 19, 2000, with From TV Animation – One Piece: Become the Pirate King!. Over forty games have been produced based on the franchise. Additionally, One Piece characters and settings have appeared in various Shonen Jump crossover games, such as Battle Stadium D.O.N, Jump Super Stars, Jump Ultimate Stars, J-Stars Victory VS and Jump Force.

Music
Music soundtracks have been released that are based on songs that premiered in the series. Kohei Tanaka and Shiro Hamaguchi composed the score for One Piece. Various theme songs and character songs were released on a total of 51 singles. Eight compilation albums and seventeen soundtrack CDs have been released featuring songs and themes that were introduced in the series. On August 11, 2019, it was announced that the musical group Sakuramen is collaborating with Kohei Tanaka to compose music for the anime's "Wano Country" story arc.

Light novels
A series of light novels was published based on the first festival film, certain episodes of the anime television series, and all but the first feature film. They feature artwork by Oda and are written by Tatsuya Hamasaki. The first of these novels, One Piece: Defeat The Pirate Ganzak! was released on June 3, 1999. One Piece: Logue Town Chapter followed on July 17, 2000, as an adaptation of the anime television series' Logue Town story arc. The first feature film to be adapted was Clockwork Island Adventure on March 19, 2001. The second, and so far last, light novel adaptation of an anime television series arc, One Piece: Thousand-year Dragon Legend, was published on December 25, 2001. The adaptation of Chopper's Kingdom on the Island of Strange Animals was released on March 22, 2002, and that of Dead End Adventure on March 10, 2003. Curse of the Sacred Sword followed on March 22, 2004, and Baron Omatsuri and the Secret Island on March 14, 2005. The light novel of The Giant Mechanical Soldier of Karakuri Castle was released on March 6, 2006, and that of The Desert Princess and the Pirates: Adventures in Alabasta on March 7, 2007. A novel adaptation of Episodes of Chopper Plus: Bloom in the Winter, Miracle Cherry Blossom was released on February 25, 2008.

Art and guidebooks
Five art books and five guidebooks for the One Piece series have been released. The first art book, One Piece: Color Walk 1, released June 2001, was also released in English by Viz Media on November 8, 2005. A second art book, One Piece: Color Walk 2, was released on November 4, 2003; and One Piece: Color Walk 3 – Lion the third art book, was released January 5, 2006. The fourth art book, subtitled Eagle, was released on March 4, 2010, and One Piece: Shark, the fifth art book, was released on December 3, 2010.

The first guidebook One Piece: Red – Grand Characters was released on March 2, 2002. The second, One Piece: Blue – Grand Data File, followed on August 2, 2002. The third guidebook, One Piece: Yellow – Grand Elements, was released on April 4, 2007, and the fourth, One Piece: Green – Secret Pieces, followed on November 4, 2010. An anime guidebook, One Piece: Rainbow!, was released on May 1, 2007, and covers the first eight years of the TV anime.

Other media
Other One Piece media include a trading card game by Bandai called One Piece CCG and a drama CD centering on the character of Nefertari Vivi released by Avex Trax on December 26, 2002. A Hello Kitty-inspired Chopper was used for several pieces of merchandise as a collaboration between One Piece and Hello Kitty. A kabuki play inspired by One Piece ran at Tokyo's Shinbashi Enbujō throughout October and November 2015.

An event called "One Piece Premier Show" debuted at Universal Studios Japan in 2007. The event has been held at the same location every year since 2010.
 * (except in 2020, when the event was canceled due to the COVID-19 pandemic). By 2018, the event has attracted over 1 million visitors. The Baratie restaurant, modeled after the restaurant of the same name in the manga, opened in June 2013 at the Fuji Television headquarters. An indoor theme park located inside the Tokyo Tower called the Tokyo One Piece Tower, which includes some attractions, shops and restaurants, opened on March 13, 2015.
 * (except in 2020, when the event was canceled due to the COVID-19 pandemic). By 2018, the event has attracted over 1 million visitors. The Baratie restaurant, modeled after the restaurant of the same name in the manga, opened in June 2013 at the Fuji Television headquarters. An indoor theme park located inside the Tokyo Tower called the Tokyo One Piece Tower, which includes some attractions, shops and restaurants, opened on March 13, 2015.
 * (except in 2020, when the event was canceled due to the COVID-19 pandemic). By 2018, the event has attracted over 1 million visitors. The Baratie restaurant, modeled after the restaurant of the same name in the manga, opened in June 2013 at the Fuji Television headquarters. An indoor theme park located inside the Tokyo Tower called the Tokyo One Piece Tower, which includes some attractions, shops and restaurants, opened on March 13, 2015.
 * (except in 2020, when the event was canceled due to the COVID-19 pandemic). By 2018, the event has attracted over 1 million visitors. The Baratie restaurant, modeled after the restaurant of the same name in the manga, opened in June 2013 at the Fuji Television headquarters. An indoor theme park located inside the Tokyo Tower called the Tokyo One Piece Tower, which includes some attractions, shops and restaurants, opened on March 13, 2015.
 * (except in 2020, when the event was canceled due to the COVID-19 pandemic). By 2018, the event has attracted over 1 million visitors. The Baratie restaurant, modeled after the restaurant of the same name in the manga, opened in June 2013 at the Fuji Television headquarters. An indoor theme park located inside the Tokyo Tower called the Tokyo One Piece Tower, which includes some attractions, shops and restaurants, opened on March 13, 2015.
 * (except in 2020, when the event was canceled due to the COVID-19 pandemic). By 2018, the event has attracted over 1 million visitors. The Baratie restaurant, modeled after the restaurant of the same name in the manga, opened in June 2013 at the Fuji Television headquarters. An indoor theme park located inside the Tokyo Tower called the Tokyo One Piece Tower, which includes some attractions, shops and restaurants, opened on March 13, 2015.
 * (except in 2020, when the event was canceled due to the COVID-19 pandemic). By 2018, the event has attracted over 1 million visitors. The Baratie restaurant, modeled after the restaurant of the same name in the manga, opened in June 2013 at the Fuji Television headquarters. An indoor theme park located inside the Tokyo Tower called the Tokyo One Piece Tower, which includes some attractions, shops and restaurants, opened on March 13, 2015.
 * (except in 2020, when the event was canceled due to the COVID-19 pandemic). By 2018, the event has attracted over 1 million visitors. The Baratie restaurant, modeled after the restaurant of the same name in the manga, opened in June 2013 at the Fuji Television headquarters. An indoor theme park located inside the Tokyo Tower called the Tokyo One Piece Tower, which includes some attractions, shops and restaurants, opened on March 13, 2015.
 * (except in 2020, when the event was canceled due to the COVID-19 pandemic). By 2018, the event has attracted over 1 million visitors. The Baratie restaurant, modeled after the restaurant of the same name in the manga, opened in June 2013 at the Fuji Television headquarters. An indoor theme park located inside the Tokyo Tower called the Tokyo One Piece Tower, which includes some attractions, shops and restaurants, opened on March 13, 2015.
 * (except in 2020, when the event was canceled due to the COVID-19 pandemic). By 2018, the event has attracted over 1 million visitors. The Baratie restaurant, modeled after the restaurant of the same name in the manga, opened in June 2013 at the Fuji Television headquarters. An indoor theme park located inside the Tokyo Tower called the Tokyo One Piece Tower, which includes some attractions, shops and restaurants, opened on March 13, 2015.

One Piece is the first-ever manga series to hold a "Dome Tour", in which events were held from March 25–27, 2011, at the Kyocera Dome in Osaka, and from April 27 – May 1 of the same year at the Tokyo Dome. In 2014, the first One Piece exhibition in South Korea was held at the War Memorial of Korea, and the second exhibition in Hongik Daehango Art Center. In 2015, a One Piece trompe-l'œil exhibition was held at the Hong Kong 3D Museum.

One Piece on Ice: Episode of Alabaster premiered on August 11, 2023, in Yokohama, starring two-time reigning world champion Shoma Uno in the lead role of Monkey D. Luffy and junior world champion Marin Honda as Princess Vivi. Other cast members included Four Continents champion Nobunari Oda, Kazuki Tomono, Keijii Tanaka, Koshiro Shimada, and Rika Hongo.

Sales
One Piece is the best-selling manga series in history; in 2012, Oricon, a Japanese company that began its own annual manga sales ranking chart in year 2008, reported that the series was the first to sell 100 million copies (the company does not report on sales figures before April 2008). The series had over 300 million copies in circulation by November 2013; it had over 440 million copies in circulation worldwide by May 2018; 460 million copies by December 2019; 470 million copies by April 2020;  480 million copies in circulation in forty-three countries worldwide by February 2021. It reached 490 million copies in print worldwide by July 2021. By August 2022, the manga had reached 516.566 million copies in circulation worldwide.

One Piece was the best-selling manga series for eleven consecutive years from 2008 until 2018. "One Piece Manga Sales Report"
 * In 2019, the manga did not top the chart for the first time in twelve years, ranking second in the annual manga sales ranking with over 10.1 million copies sold, although it remained as the best-selling manga by volume in its twelfth consecutive year. It was the third best-selling manga series in 2020, with over 7.7 million copies sold, while volumes 95–97 were the 23rd–25th best-selling manga volumes of 2020, behind the first twenty-two volumes of Demon Slayer: Kimetsu no Yaiba. In 2021, it was the sixth best selling manga with over 7 million copies sold, while volumes 98, 99, and 100 were the sixth, eighth, and ninth best-selling manga volumes, respectively. It was the fourth best-selling manga series in 2022, with over 10.3 million copies sold; volumes 101–104 were among the 10 best-selling manga volumes of the year. It was the fifth best-selling manga series in the first half of 2023 (period between November 2022 and May 2023), with over 3.5 million copies sold, while volume 105 was the best-selling manga volume from the same period; volume 104 placed nineteenth. Volumes 105–107 were among the best-selling manga volumes of 2023. Volume 108 was Shueisha's highest first print run manga volume of 2023–2024 (period between April 2023 and March 2024), with 3.2 million copies printed.
 * In 2019, the manga did not top the chart for the first time in twelve years, ranking second in the annual manga sales ranking with over 10.1 million copies sold, although it remained as the best-selling manga by volume in its twelfth consecutive year. It was the third best-selling manga series in 2020, with over 7.7 million copies sold, while volumes 95–97 were the 23rd–25th best-selling manga volumes of 2020, behind the first twenty-two volumes of Demon Slayer: Kimetsu no Yaiba. In 2021, it was the sixth best selling manga with over 7 million copies sold, while volumes 98, 99, and 100 were the sixth, eighth, and ninth best-selling manga volumes, respectively. It was the fourth best-selling manga series in 2022, with over 10.3 million copies sold; volumes 101–104 were among the 10 best-selling manga volumes of the year. It was the fifth best-selling manga series in the first half of 2023 (period between November 2022 and May 2023), with over 3.5 million copies sold, while volume 105 was the best-selling manga volume from the same period; volume 104 placed nineteenth. Volumes 105–107 were among the best-selling manga volumes of 2023. Volume 108 was Shueisha's highest first print run manga volume of 2023–2024 (period between April 2023 and March 2024), with 3.2 million copies printed.
 * In 2019, the manga did not top the chart for the first time in twelve years, ranking second in the annual manga sales ranking with over 10.1 million copies sold, although it remained as the best-selling manga by volume in its twelfth consecutive year. It was the third best-selling manga series in 2020, with over 7.7 million copies sold, while volumes 95–97 were the 23rd–25th best-selling manga volumes of 2020, behind the first twenty-two volumes of Demon Slayer: Kimetsu no Yaiba. In 2021, it was the sixth best selling manga with over 7 million copies sold, while volumes 98, 99, and 100 were the sixth, eighth, and ninth best-selling manga volumes, respectively. It was the fourth best-selling manga series in 2022, with over 10.3 million copies sold; volumes 101–104 were among the 10 best-selling manga volumes of the year. It was the fifth best-selling manga series in the first half of 2023 (period between November 2022 and May 2023), with over 3.5 million copies sold, while volume 105 was the best-selling manga volume from the same period; volume 104 placed nineteenth. Volumes 105–107 were among the best-selling manga volumes of 2023. Volume 108 was Shueisha's highest first print run manga volume of 2023–2024 (period between April 2023 and March 2024), with 3.2 million copies printed.
 * In 2019, the manga did not top the chart for the first time in twelve years, ranking second in the annual manga sales ranking with over 10.1 million copies sold, although it remained as the best-selling manga by volume in its twelfth consecutive year. It was the third best-selling manga series in 2020, with over 7.7 million copies sold, while volumes 95–97 were the 23rd–25th best-selling manga volumes of 2020, behind the first twenty-two volumes of Demon Slayer: Kimetsu no Yaiba. In 2021, it was the sixth best selling manga with over 7 million copies sold, while volumes 98, 99, and 100 were the sixth, eighth, and ninth best-selling manga volumes, respectively. It was the fourth best-selling manga series in 2022, with over 10.3 million copies sold; volumes 101–104 were among the 10 best-selling manga volumes of the year. It was the fifth best-selling manga series in the first half of 2023 (period between November 2022 and May 2023), with over 3.5 million copies sold, while volume 105 was the best-selling manga volume from the same period; volume 104 placed nineteenth. Volumes 105–107 were among the best-selling manga volumes of 2023. Volume 108 was Shueisha's highest first print run manga volume of 2023–2024 (period between April 2023 and March 2024), with 3.2 million copies printed.
 * In 2019, the manga did not top the chart for the first time in twelve years, ranking second in the annual manga sales ranking with over 10.1 million copies sold, although it remained as the best-selling manga by volume in its twelfth consecutive year. It was the third best-selling manga series in 2020, with over 7.7 million copies sold, while volumes 95–97 were the 23rd–25th best-selling manga volumes of 2020, behind the first twenty-two volumes of Demon Slayer: Kimetsu no Yaiba. In 2021, it was the sixth best selling manga with over 7 million copies sold, while volumes 98, 99, and 100 were the sixth, eighth, and ninth best-selling manga volumes, respectively. It was the fourth best-selling manga series in 2022, with over 10.3 million copies sold; volumes 101–104 were among the 10 best-selling manga volumes of the year. It was the fifth best-selling manga series in the first half of 2023 (period between November 2022 and May 2023), with over 3.5 million copies sold, while volume 105 was the best-selling manga volume from the same period; volume 104 placed nineteenth. Volumes 105–107 were among the best-selling manga volumes of 2023. Volume 108 was Shueisha's highest first print run manga volume of 2023–2024 (period between April 2023 and March 2024), with 3.2 million copies printed.
 * In 2019, the manga did not top the chart for the first time in twelve years, ranking second in the annual manga sales ranking with over 10.1 million copies sold, although it remained as the best-selling manga by volume in its twelfth consecutive year. It was the third best-selling manga series in 2020, with over 7.7 million copies sold, while volumes 95–97 were the 23rd–25th best-selling manga volumes of 2020, behind the first twenty-two volumes of Demon Slayer: Kimetsu no Yaiba. In 2021, it was the sixth best selling manga with over 7 million copies sold, while volumes 98, 99, and 100 were the sixth, eighth, and ninth best-selling manga volumes, respectively. It was the fourth best-selling manga series in 2022, with over 10.3 million copies sold; volumes 101–104 were among the 10 best-selling manga volumes of the year. It was the fifth best-selling manga series in the first half of 2023 (period between November 2022 and May 2023), with over 3.5 million copies sold, while volume 105 was the best-selling manga volume from the same period; volume 104 placed nineteenth. Volumes 105–107 were among the best-selling manga volumes of 2023. Volume 108 was Shueisha's highest first print run manga volume of 2023–2024 (period between April 2023 and March 2024), with 3.2 million copies printed.
 * In 2019, the manga did not top the chart for the first time in twelve years, ranking second in the annual manga sales ranking with over 10.1 million copies sold, although it remained as the best-selling manga by volume in its twelfth consecutive year. It was the third best-selling manga series in 2020, with over 7.7 million copies sold, while volumes 95–97 were the 23rd–25th best-selling manga volumes of 2020, behind the first twenty-two volumes of Demon Slayer: Kimetsu no Yaiba. In 2021, it was the sixth best selling manga with over 7 million copies sold, while volumes 98, 99, and 100 were the sixth, eighth, and ninth best-selling manga volumes, respectively. It was the fourth best-selling manga series in 2022, with over 10.3 million copies sold; volumes 101–104 were among the 10 best-selling manga volumes of the year. It was the fifth best-selling manga series in the first half of 2023 (period between November 2022 and May 2023), with over 3.5 million copies sold, while volume 105 was the best-selling manga volume from the same period; volume 104 placed nineteenth. Volumes 105–107 were among the best-selling manga volumes of 2023. Volume 108 was Shueisha's highest first print run manga volume of 2023–2024 (period between April 2023 and March 2024), with 3.2 million copies printed.
 * In 2019, the manga did not top the chart for the first time in twelve years, ranking second in the annual manga sales ranking with over 10.1 million copies sold, although it remained as the best-selling manga by volume in its twelfth consecutive year. It was the third best-selling manga series in 2020, with over 7.7 million copies sold, while volumes 95–97 were the 23rd–25th best-selling manga volumes of 2020, behind the first twenty-two volumes of Demon Slayer: Kimetsu no Yaiba. In 2021, it was the sixth best selling manga with over 7 million copies sold, while volumes 98, 99, and 100 were the sixth, eighth, and ninth best-selling manga volumes, respectively. It was the fourth best-selling manga series in 2022, with over 10.3 million copies sold; volumes 101–104 were among the 10 best-selling manga volumes of the year. It was the fifth best-selling manga series in the first half of 2023 (period between November 2022 and May 2023), with over 3.5 million copies sold, while volume 105 was the best-selling manga volume from the same period; volume 104 placed nineteenth. Volumes 105–107 were among the best-selling manga volumes of 2023. Volume 108 was Shueisha's highest first print run manga volume of 2023–2024 (period between April 2023 and March 2024), with 3.2 million copies printed.
 * In 2019, the manga did not top the chart for the first time in twelve years, ranking second in the annual manga sales ranking with over 10.1 million copies sold, although it remained as the best-selling manga by volume in its twelfth consecutive year. It was the third best-selling manga series in 2020, with over 7.7 million copies sold, while volumes 95–97 were the 23rd–25th best-selling manga volumes of 2020, behind the first twenty-two volumes of Demon Slayer: Kimetsu no Yaiba. In 2021, it was the sixth best selling manga with over 7 million copies sold, while volumes 98, 99, and 100 were the sixth, eighth, and ninth best-selling manga volumes, respectively. It was the fourth best-selling manga series in 2022, with over 10.3 million copies sold; volumes 101–104 were among the 10 best-selling manga volumes of the year. It was the fifth best-selling manga series in the first half of 2023 (period between November 2022 and May 2023), with over 3.5 million copies sold, while volume 105 was the best-selling manga volume from the same period; volume 104 placed nineteenth. Volumes 105–107 were among the best-selling manga volumes of 2023. Volume 108 was Shueisha's highest first print run manga volume of 2023–2024 (period between April 2023 and March 2024), with 3.2 million copies printed.
 * In 2019, the manga did not top the chart for the first time in twelve years, ranking second in the annual manga sales ranking with over 10.1 million copies sold, although it remained as the best-selling manga by volume in its twelfth consecutive year. It was the third best-selling manga series in 2020, with over 7.7 million copies sold, while volumes 95–97 were the 23rd–25th best-selling manga volumes of 2020, behind the first twenty-two volumes of Demon Slayer: Kimetsu no Yaiba. In 2021, it was the sixth best selling manga with over 7 million copies sold, while volumes 98, 99, and 100 were the sixth, eighth, and ninth best-selling manga volumes, respectively. It was the fourth best-selling manga series in 2022, with over 10.3 million copies sold; volumes 101–104 were among the 10 best-selling manga volumes of the year. It was the fifth best-selling manga series in the first half of 2023 (period between November 2022 and May 2023), with over 3.5 million copies sold, while volume 105 was the best-selling manga volume from the same period; volume 104 placed nineteenth. Volumes 105–107 were among the best-selling manga volumes of 2023. Volume 108 was Shueisha's highest first print run manga volume of 2023–2024 (period between April 2023 and March 2024), with 3.2 million copies printed.
 * In 2019, the manga did not top the chart for the first time in twelve years, ranking second in the annual manga sales ranking with over 10.1 million copies sold, although it remained as the best-selling manga by volume in its twelfth consecutive year. It was the third best-selling manga series in 2020, with over 7.7 million copies sold, while volumes 95–97 were the 23rd–25th best-selling manga volumes of 2020, behind the first twenty-two volumes of Demon Slayer: Kimetsu no Yaiba. In 2021, it was the sixth best selling manga with over 7 million copies sold, while volumes 98, 99, and 100 were the sixth, eighth, and ninth best-selling manga volumes, respectively. It was the fourth best-selling manga series in 2022, with over 10.3 million copies sold; volumes 101–104 were among the 10 best-selling manga volumes of the year. It was the fifth best-selling manga series in the first half of 2023 (period between November 2022 and May 2023), with over 3.5 million copies sold, while volume 105 was the best-selling manga volume from the same period; volume 104 placed nineteenth. Volumes 105–107 were among the best-selling manga volumes of 2023. Volume 108 was Shueisha's highest first print run manga volume of 2023–2024 (period between April 2023 and March 2024), with 3.2 million copies printed.

Individual volumes of One Piece have broken publishing and sales records in Japan. In 2009, the 56th volume had a print run of 2.85 million, the highest initial print run of any manga by then. The 57th volume had a print run of 3 million in 2010, a record that was broken several times by subsequent volumes. The 60th volume had a first print run of 3.4 million and was the first book to sell over two million copies in its opening week on Oricon book rankings, and later became the first book to sell over three million copies in Oricon's history. In 2012, the 67th volume had an initial print run of 4.05 million, holding the record of the volume with the highest number of copies in the first print. One Piece is the only manga that had an initial print of volumes of above 3 million continuously for more than ten years. In May 2023, it was reported that each of the 105 volumes, published by then, had sold over 1 million copies. Additionally, One Piece is the only work whose volumes have ranked first every year in Oricon's weekly comic chart existence since 2008.

One Piece has also sold well in North America, charting on Publishers Weekly's list of best-selling comics for April/May 2007 and numerous times on The New York Times Manga Best Seller list. On ICv2s list of Top 25 Manga Properties Fall 2008 for North America, which is compiled by interviews with retailers and distributors, Nielsen BookScan's Top 20 Lists of graphic novels and ICv2s own analysis of information provided by Diamond Comic Distributors, One Piece came in fifteenth place. It rose to second place on their Top 25 Manga Properties Q3 2010 list. By August 2022, the manga has sold 2.9 million copies in print in North America (including single volumes and omnibus editions).

In France, One Piece has been the best-selling manga since 2011, with over 31.80 million copies sold by August 2022. The manga is very popular in the country, where its sales alone represent 8.5% of the French manga market by 2021. The first volume had sold more than 1 million copies in France by July 2021. The 100th volume had one of the biggest initial prints ever for a manga in the French market, selling 131,270 copies in just three days, the best-selling manga volume in a week in the country. The manga sold 6,011,536 copies in 2021. This amount represents almost 20% of the total sales in the country; almost one in five volumes of the series was sold in the year.

In Italy, One Piece had 18 million copies in circulation by April 2021. which represents around 22.5% of the series market outside Japan. In September 2021, the limited edition of the ninety-eighth volume ranked first in the best-selling books weekly ranking, making it the first time that a manga reaches that achievement.

In Germany, One Piece is the second best-selling manga behind Dragon Ball. The manga had sold 6.7 million copies in the country.

Critical response
Allen Divers of Anime News Network comments in 2003 that the art style One Piece employs "initially seems very cartoonish with much of the character designs showing more North American influence than that from its Japanese origins", adding that the "artwork and settings come across as timeless in their presentation". He also notes that the influence of Akira Toriyama (Dragon Ball) shines through in Oda's style of writing with its "huge epic battles punctuated by a lot of humor" and that, in One Piece, he "manages to share a rich tale without getting bogged down by overly complicated plots". Rebecca Silverman of the same site stated that one of the series' strengths is to "blend action, humor, and heavy fare together" and praised the art, but stated that the panels could get too crowded for easy reading. The website activeAnime describes the artwork in One Piece as "wonderfully quirky and full of expression". Mario Vuk from Splash Comics commented that Oda's "pleasantly bright and dynamic" art style suits the story's "funny and exciting" atmosphere. Isaiah Colbert of Kotaku called One Piece a "masterpiece", highlighting Oda's character writing, world-building and the balance between "fun and serious subject matter". Dale Bashir of IGN wrote that One Piece is more about the world-building, adventuring, and the meaning of freedom instead of the "usual shonen battling" from series like Dragon Ball and Naruto. Bashir concluded: "While not everyone would want to go so far for a franchise that isn't even finished yet, trust me when I say that it is definitely worth it."

EX Media lauds Oda's art for its "crispy" monochrome pictures, "great use of subtle shade changes" on color pages, "sometimes exquisite" use of angles, and for its consistency. Shaenon K. Garrity, who at some point edited the series for English Shonen Jump, said that, while doing so, her amazement over Oda's craft grew steadily. She states that "he has a natural, playful mastery of the often restrictive weekly-manga format," notes that "interesting things [are] going on deep in the narrative structure," and recommends "sticking through to the later volumes to see just how crazy and Peter Max-y the art gets". Mania Entertainment writer Jarred Pine commented: "One Piece is a fun adventure story, with an ensemble cast that is continuing to develop, with great action and character drama." He praised Oda's artwork as "imaginative and creative" and commented that "Oda's imagination just oozes all of the panels [sic]". He also noted that "Oda's panel work [...] features a lot of interesting perspectives and direction, especially during the explosive action sequences which are always a blast".

In March 2021, Mobile Suit Gundam's creator, Yoshiyuki Tomino, said in his interview that One Piece is the "only manga to trust". He praised the manga, commenting: "Still, we are working in the same studio and I saw storyboards near the photocopier. Unlike mine, those storyboards are good. But, you know, among the popular manga there is manga with very beautiful art and manga with bad art, but interesting nonetheless. And I don't trust manga with very beautiful art unless it is One Piece.

After the release of the hundredth volume, Weekly Shonen Jump's editor-in-chief, Hiroyuki Nakano, explained how One Piece changed the history of manga and the way of making it. Nakano said that Weekly Shonen Jump is "a game of weekly popularity", and before One Piece, he aimed for something "interesting this week without thinking about the next"; however, the series reached overwhelming popularity due to its style that involves a story concept and detailed hints, adding that the series had a huge impact on other series. Nakano lauded Oda for his "overwhelming passion, talent and power" and his "unwavering will" to deliver a story to boys and girls, adding that he goes far beyond the reader's expectations, with the belief in "don't fool the reader" and "there is something interesting ahead of it".

Merchandise
The brand made more than $1 billion in retail sales in Japan by 2004.

Awards and accolades
One Piece was nominated for the 23rd Kodansha Manga Award in the shōnen category in 1999. It was a finalist for the Tezuka Osamu Cultural Prize three times in a row from 2000 to 2002,  with the highest number of fan nominations in the first two years. The manga was nominated for Favorite Manga Series in Nickelodeon Magazine's 2009 Comics Awards. In 2012, the series won the 41st Japan Cartoonists Association Award Grand Prize, alongside Kimuchi Yokoyama's Neko Darake. In 2014, the series received the 18th Yomiuri Advertising Award's Golden Medal. It also won the 34th Newspaper Advertising Award in the Advertising category and the 67th Advertising Dentsu Award in Newspaper Advertising Planning category.

The forty-sixth volume of One Piece was the best manga of 2007, according to the Oricon's Japanese Book of the Year Action Committee. The series was chosen as one of the best continuing manga for all ages/teens in 2011 by critics from About.com, Anime News Network, and ComicsAlliance. The series has ranked on the "Book of the Year" list from Media Factory's Da Vinci magazine, where professional book reviewers, bookstore employees, and Da Vinci readers participate; it ranked fifth in 2011; second in 2012; third in 2013; second in 2014, 2015 and 2016;  third in 2017 and 2018;  second in 2019; third in 2020 and 2021;  second in 2022; and third in 2023. It ranked eighth in the 2023 edition of Takarajimasha's Kono Manga ga Sugoi! list of best manga for male readers.

The German translation of the manga won the Sondermann Award in the international manga category in 2005. The series received the award for the forty-fourth volume in 2008 and the forty-eighth volume in 2009. One Piece won the AnimeLand's Anime & Manga 19th Grand Prix for the "Best Classic Shōnen" category in 2012.

In a poll conducted by Oricon in 2008 about "the most moving (touching) manga ever", One Piece ranked first in both male and female categories. In another 2008 poll by Oricon, Japanese teenagers voted it the most interesting manga. On Tencent's anime and manga web portal, One Piece ranked first in a poll of "must-read manga for the younger generation in China". In a poll conducted by eBookJapan in 2014 about "manga that children want to read" for "Children's Reading Day" by the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology, the series also ranked first.

On June 15, 2015, it was announced that Eiichiro Oda and One Piece had set the Guinness World Record for "The most copies published for the same comic book series by a single author" with 320,866,000 copies printed worldwide by December 2014; it updated the record on August 4, 2022, when it reached over 500 million copies in circulation worldwide in both print and digital copies (416,566,000 in Japan and 100 million copies in 60 countries and territories outside of Japan). The series ranked fourth on the first annual Tsutaya Comic Awards' All-Time Best Section in 2017. In 2021, TV Asahi announced the results of its "Manga General Election" poll in which 150,000 people voted for their "Most Favorite Manga", One Piece ranked first on the list.

In 2014, the "One Piece Premiere Summer" event received the "Best Overall Production" award from the International Association of Amusement Parks and Attractions.

Cultural impact
As part of an effort to help Kumamoto Prefecture recover from the 2016 earthquakes, Oda helped set up 10 statues of the Straw Hat Pirates around the prefecture. Luffy was the first statue to be unveiled in front of the Kumamoto Prefectual Government Office on November 30, 2018. Jinbe was the last statue, unveiled at Sumiyoshi Kaigan Park on July 23, 2022.

At the 2020 Tokyo Olympics, Greek athlete Miltiadis Tentoglou performed a "Gear Second" pose before winning a gold medal in the men's long jump competition. A gene in the fruit fly (Drosophila melanogaster) was named "Baramicin", partly taking inspiration from the One Piece character Buggy. The gene encodes a protein that is split up into multiple parts. A testate amoeba genus was named Alabasta, partly in reference to the One Piece Kingdom of Alabasta, also known as the Kingdom of Sand, a desert kingdom located on Sandy Island in the Paradise region.

title: One Piece


text:
User:Bulatych

I joined Wikipedia on November 8, 2003.

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: User:Bulatych


text:
SL

SL may refer to:

Arts and entertainment

 * SL (rapper), a rapper from London
 * Second Life, a multi-user 3D virtual world
 * Sensei's Library, an Internet site dedicated to the game of Go
 * Subdominant leittonwechselklänge
 * Leica SL, a mirrorless system camera by Leica Camera AG

Business and organizations

 * Sociedad Limitada, the Spanish version of a private limited company

Politics

 * Serbian Left (Srpska levica), a political party in Serbia
 * Stronnictwo Ludowe, a defunct Polish political party
 * Soyons Libres, a French political party

Transportation and vehicles

 * SL Corporation, a Korean auto parts company
 * Rio Sul Serviços Aéreos Regionais (IATA code SL), a Brazilian airline
 * Salt Lake City Southern Railroad (reporting mark SL)
 * Stor-Oslo Lokaltrafikk, a public transport operator in Akershus, Norway
 * Storstockholms Lokaltrafik, the public transport operator in Stockholm, Sweden
 * Thai Lion Air (IATA airline code SL)
 * Mercedes-Benz SL-Class, an automobile

Trade unions

 * Association of Social Educators, a trade union in Denmark

Geography

 * Sierra Leone, in West Africa, ISO 3166 code
 * Saarland, a state of Germany
 * SL postcode area of the United Kingdom
 * Sungai Long, in Selangor, Malaysia
 * Sri Lanka, an island country in South Asia

Language

 * Sl (digraph), a Latin-script digraph
 * Sign language, used by deaf persons
 * Slovene language (ISO 639-1 code "sl")

Biology

 * Sensu lato, a term used in taxonomy to mean "in the wider sense" of a definition
 * Standard length, a common measurement for fish
 * Abbreviation for × Sophrolaelia, an orchid genus

Computing

 * sl, a humorous command in some Unix-based systems that draws an animation of a steam locomotive, intended to be invoked as a typo of ls
 * .sl, the country code top-level domain for Sierra Leone
 * SL (complexity), a class of computational complexity
 * Scientific Linux, a Linux distribution
 * Service Loading, a variant of WAP push method

Mathematics

 * SL (complexity), a class of computational complexity
 * sl (elliptic function), sine lemniscate function
 * Special linear group in mathematics, denoted SLn
 * Special linear Lie algebra, denoted $$\mathfrak{sl}_n(F)$$ or $$\mathfrak{sl}(n, F)$$.

Other uses

 * Serjeant-at-law, a former type of barrister in England and Ireland
 * Sine loco in bibliographies means that place of publication is unknown
 * Surround Left (SL) speaker on a 5.1 surround sound setup

title: SL


text:
User talk:Ianb

File source problem with File:Shinkansen-300-maibara.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Shinkansen-300-maibara.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 10:18, 11 July 2009 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:18, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

File:Harajuku-eki-central-exit.jpg listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Harajuku-eki-central-exit.jpg, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted.  F ASTILYsock (T ALK ) 03:02, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

File:Yoyogi-stn.jpg needs authorship information
Dear uploader:

The media file you uploaded as File:Yoyogi-stn.jpg appears to be missing information as to its authorship (and or source), or if you did provide such information, it is confusing for others trying to make use of the image.

It would be appreciated if you would consider updating the file description page, to make the authorship of the media clearer.

Although some images may not need author information in obvious cases, (such where an applicable source is provided), authorship information aids users of the image, and helps ensure that appropriate credit is given (a requirement of some licenses).

 * If you created this media yourself, please consider explicitly including your user name, for which: will produce an appropriate expansion, or use the own template.

 * If this is an old image, for which the authorship is unknown or impossible to determine, please indicate this on the file description page.

If you have any questions please see Help:File page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 15:23, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

File:Shinbashi-eki-small.jpg missing description details
Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as: is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors make better use of the image, and it will be more informative to readers.
 * File:Shinbashi-eki-small.jpg

If the information is not provided, the image may eventually be proposed for deletion, a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.

If you have any questions, please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Theo's Little Bot (error?) 09:08, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:54, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

File:Shinbashi-eki-small.jpg listed for discussion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Shinbashi-eki-small.jpg, has been listed at Files for discussion. Please see the to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:15, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

Current frigates listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Current frigates. Since you had some involvement with the Current frigates redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Steel1943 (talk) 20:19, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

File:Yoyogi-koen-harajuku-mon 2004-05-11.jpg listed for discussion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Yoyogi-koen-harajuku-mon 2004-05-11.jpg, has been listed at Files for discussion. Please see the to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Iazyges  Consermonor   Opus meum  06:57, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

title: User talk:Ianb


text:
Wikipedia talk:What Wikipedia is not/Unencyclopedic

''Once upon a time, lots of people voted on votes for deletion by saying "delete, unencyclopedic". Then, one day, Oliver Pereira "started a campaign" to try and eliminate usage of the word, and encourage more specific (he would say, more meaningful) alternatives. Below is the archive of that discussion.''

Discussion
When describing material on Vfd, is the word "unencyclopedic" useful or useless? Contributors weigh in.

moved from VfD

 * Keep. And I'm hereby starting a campaign against the word "unencyclopedic". It just begs the question. "Unencyclopedic" = "shouldn't be in an encyclopaedia" = "should be deleted from an encyclopaedia". So you're just saying, "This should be deleted because it should be deleted." I think the only meaningful criterion for inclusion of a person (or any other subject) is the amount of verifiable information we can obtain on them. And I think this person has quite enough. (Over 1,000 Google hits, for a start.) And what we have is, in any case, interesting. :) So keep! -- Oliver P. 01:49, 28 Sep 2003 (UTC)
 * Hear hear! Let us stamp out use of this terribly irritating word. I read "This is unencyclopedic" as "I don't understand this." or "I don't like this." or "I don't think this person is important, even if a million other people do." (cf. snooker player incident) -- Jake 20:05, 29 Sep 2003 (UTC)
 * Don't criticise me about that. Why do you criticise me instead of my actions? RickK 05:36, 30 Sep 2003 (UTC)
 * "unencyclopedic" is simply shorthand for "I don't think this topic is note-worthy or relevant enough to include in an encyclopedia". That's a valid and useful distinction. An encyclopedia should only contain information about note-worthy things. Most relatives of famous people are not note-worthy and are therefore unencyclopedic. Not everyone who's written a book is encyclopedic (there are probably millions of people who have written books). In this case, it's a relative of a famous person who has written a book, and has some unusual views which have presumably come up in the news and embarrassed this famous person. So he may be encyclopedic - I think in this case it's a matter of opinion (that's why we vote). But "unencyclopedic" is still a useful term. Axlrosen 04:07, 30 Sep 2003 (UTC)
 * Hear, hear. RickK 05:36, 30 Sep 2003 (UTC)

end of moved text

copied from User talk:Oliver Pereira

Re: "unencyclopedic". I rather like that term, and I believe I use it in the following (not necessarily distinct) non-tautological ways:
 * "unencyclopedic" = "unimportant (my own subjective assessment, of course)"
 * "unencyclopedic" = "does not match my idea of the Platonic ideal of encyclopedic content"
 * "unencyclopedic" = "readers don't come to an encyclopedia looking for that info"
 * "unencyclopedic" = "when readers see this material, it will adversely affect their opinion of Wikipedia as an authoritative source of information"

I suppose I could use the longer phrases...

Cheers, Cyan 03:37, 28 Sep 2003 (UTC)

 * Hmm... Well, if the term means lots of different things to you, perhaps it would be good to use the longer explanations; otherwise we wouldn't know which one you meant. :) I think the main problem with the term is that everyone has a different idea of what an encyclopaedia should be, so unless you can be sure that you are using it to people who have the same idea as you, it's not very helpful. I'll tell you my idea of the ideal encyclopaedia. I think the goal should be complete coverage of all human knowledge. :) Unattainable, of course, but what Platonic ideals aren't? I think that general encyclopedias were always meant to contain all of human knowledge, but that they were frustrated in getting anywhere near that goal by all sorts of constraints. Early encyclopaedists had limited staff (usually staff need to be paid), limited time (they have to publish the finished version at some point), and limited space (who would buy a 1,000,000 volume encyclopaedia?). Wikipedia doesn't suffer from the same constraints. It has millions of potential editors, doesn't need to pay them, there's no publication deadline, and hard discs are cheap! So I think the traditional idea of what an encyclopaedia is can be pretty much thrown away. :) -- Oliver P. 04:12, 28 Sep 2003 (UTC)

 * Hope you don't mind if enter your conversation... I have always been unhappy with the fact that "unencyclopedic", when used as an argument in dispute, is much frowned upon and often regarded useless. Philosphical problems (read: tautological definition) aside, I think it would be very helpful if Wikipedia had a stated ideal of what an encyclopedia should be. Do you know of any (failed?) attempts at reaching a consensus about this? Best, Kosebamse 07:33, 28 Sep 2003 (UTC) - or, to put it differently (as there are, of course, endless debates about what an encyclopedia should be): has there been any discussion resulting in a consensus that the term "unencyclopedic" is not a valid argument? Kosebamse 07:43, 28 Sep 2003 (UTC)

 * I have to disagree completely with "I think the goal should be complete coverage of all human knowledge." Frankly, that would be useless - there would be so much information that it would overwhelm the reader. It would be information, but it would cease to be knowledge. The job of an encyclopedia is to serve as a filter (created by humans) of all possible human knowledge, so as to include the wheat and exclude the chaff (aka the "unencyclopedic"). The NYC phone book is part of "all human knowledge", should that be included? How about every phone book in the world? No, there are better sources for that information than Wikipedia (or any encyclopedia, Platonic or not). Similarly for every primary school in the world, or every relative of every actor, or everything that gets a few dozen hits on Google. They don't belong in an encyclopedia. (FYI This semi-rant is directed as much at the geo-bot debate as the "unencyclopedic" debate.) Axlrosen 21:56, 30 Sep 2003 (UTC)

end of copied text

 * I agree with Oliver P., people should be more specific if they have objections against an article text than using this vague general term "unencyclopedic". - Patrick 08:27, 30 Sep 2003 (UTC)

 * Strictly speaking, "unencyclopedic" is the most precise way to say that something should not be included in an encyclopedia - VfD could be retitled list of unencyclopedic articles - and says nothing more. Cyan's list above is good; people should say which of the four things they really mean when they say "unencyclopedic". I think in some cases the the word is just a six-syllable way to avoid voicing one's real objections in a form that could be rebutted point by point. Stan 13:24, 30 Sep 2003 (UTC)

 * Actually, the most precise and concise way is the verb "delete"... Martin 21:29, 30 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Whilst I understand your concerns Oliver, I have no problem with "unencyclopedic" being given as the reason for listing a page. The aim is to give a brief description on why you are listing something here, not a 500 word essay on the meaning of unencyclopedic and how such a term may be applied to the article in question. Everyone knows what it means. If others wish to point out why something should be included, then they can do that, but 'unencyclopedic' is a great way of putting across what is wrong with an article in a single word, and possibly a more diplomatic way of saying what you really think of an article. As for Jake's comment on "the snooker player incident" – I fail to see what the problem is here. The whole point of VfD is that it prevents mistaken deletions taking place. It gives people a week to point out that in fact someone is famous. You can't expect all Wikipedians to be familiar with every sporting hero or otherwise 'famous' person. Rick hadn't heard of him - fair enough – it wasn't deleted, so what's the problem? It was perfectly valid for Rick to list the page here as at the time the 37 word 'article' gave no indication that this person was "encyclopedic". Angela 21:02, Sep 30, 2003 (UTC)

 * It's vague: precision is good. "incomprehensible" or "rant" or "nonsense" or "never heard of this person" or "too obscure" or "fails google test" or "uninformative" or "unhelpful" or "vehicle for advertising" or ....

 * By all means use "unencyclopedic" when you don't really know, or can't put into words, why you want to delete something. That's what I do. Martin 21:27, 30 Sep 2003 (UTC)

I don't see what the problem is with unencyclopædic. It is a perfectly straight-forward term with an obvious meaning - does this belong in an encyclopædia? The implicit questions raised by the term are:
 * 1) Is the topic worthy of enclusion in an encyclopædia? (Josef Stalin clearly is, Shades of nail-varnish clearly isn't, unless it is an article that charts the use of colour in female make-up from say a historical perspective, etc. List of Albums by the Eagles clearly is. My Pet Dog is called woofy isn't, unless it is the name of an album, book, film etc. It doesn't take a brain surgeon to spot the encyclopædic from the unencyclopædic.
 * 2) Is the content encyclopædic? (ie, is it neutral, informative, balanced, well written, etc?)
 * 3) If the content currently isn't, can it be made so? If the topic isn't, can it be made so? If the answer is no, then the article belongs as some scribble on the back of a notepad but not on wikipedia, just as it would not get into Encyclopedia Brittanica, World Book, etc.

The issue is perfectly clear and an obvious reference point for deciding what should and what should not be in an encyclopædia. FearÉIREANN 22:12, 30 Sep 2003 (UTC)

 * I guess I'd just prefer to see these things made explicit. Hence: rather than:

 * shades of nail varnish - unencyclopedic Martin 22:45, 30 Sep 2003 (UTC)
 * Alan Davies - unencyclopedic. Martin 22:45, 30 Sep 2003 (UTC)

 * One would have:

 * * shades of nail varnish - trivia, unimportant topic. Martin 22:45, 30 Sep 2003 (UTC)
 * * Alan Davies - current content irredeemably POV. Martin 22:45, 30 Sep 2003 (UTC)

 * I just think the latter is more useful to folks reading the VfD page. Martin 22:45, 30 Sep 2003 (UTC)

 * When I have used the word unencyclopedic in the past, I meant that it did not belong here for a wide variety of reasons I thought would be obvious to everyone else too (like obscenity, "I know it when I see it."), however, some have disagreed (for example, I can think of a dozen places I'd look to find an Eagles discography before trying an encyclopedia, however, speaking as one who has struggled with being colorblind and using nail varnish, I'd love for someone to finally explain to me what Cleopatra or Zing or WetNWild #401 actually are, especially if they could provide the nearest Pantone or CMYK numbers!) so perhaps clarification is always a good idea. So, I'll stop using the word. -- Paige 03:47, 1 Oct 2003 (UTC)

How about simply "unencyclopedic, reason why"? Best of both worlds :) Dysprosia 03:51, 1 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Yep, the best of the world of redundancy coupled with the best of the world of rational discourse. :) But still, even the best of the world of redundancy is still redundant, so best to leave it out, I think. Angela says, "The aim is to give a brief description on why you are listing something here," and I entirely agree. My point is that the word "unencyclopedic" is not such a description. It gives no further information than that already conveyed by the fact that something is being listed on Vfd in the first place: that it doesn't belong in an encyclopaedia. I think it is only courteous for people to say why they think that. After all, others might disagree, and they frequently do. What we should aim for is a consensus on what should and should not be deleted, and there is no hope of any consensus being formed if people won't even say what their problems with articles are. (Sorry for dragging this up again after a week, but I took a break from the Wikipedia, and I have to have my say!) -- Oliver P. 07:05, 8 Oct 2003 (UTC)

 * I think this is now deprecated by uninformative and unverifiable, both of which are more precise expressions of similar statements. Martin 23:49, 25 Nov 2003 (UTC)

 * I'm not sure what you mean by that. If you mean that when people say "unencyclopedic" they really mean "uninformative and unverifiable", then I disagree. As far as I can make out, they usually mean nothing more nor less than "I don't like this". A lot (most?) of the time, the word is used for articles that are perfectly informative (in the sense that they contain information) and verifiable. It seems to me that the perceived problems are more usually to do with lack of fame, or "triviality" (like your shades of nail varnish example), although of course it's difficult to know unless people explicitly say what their problems are. If, on the other hand, you are just stating your own personal view of what is suitable for an encyclopaedia, then fine (except that I don't understand your idea of what "informative" means; I'll bring that up elsewhere). However, it's clear that other people have very different views on what is suitable for an encyclopaedia, so they should subsitute different terms, depending on what their views are. -- Oliver P. 00:41, 13 Apr 2004 (UTC)

See also: User:Cyan/Unencyclopedic for Cyan's POV on the matter, and User talk:Cyan/Unencyclopedic for a related discussion between The Cunctator and Cyan

See also What Wikipedia is not


text:
Talk:Proof by exhaustion

controversy?
I don't think that proof by exhaustion itself is controversial at all among mathematicians -- but its application or use in particular circumstances (e.g. 4-colour theorem) IS controversial. I think it's important to make this distinction clear. The logical validity of proof by exhaustion is not in doubt, but its application and veracity in concrete cases by mortal humans is another matter. Revolver

 * Agreed. Specific applications of this method of proof may be controversial, but the method itself is not. Gandalf61 08:31, Nov 9, 2003 (UTC)

It may not be controversial to use but still may be seen as less valid from the point of view of understanding. It could be to do with the general mistrust of computers! skukok

Aside from that, one could mention, for example, chess problems, as a mid-range example where the proof is effectively exhaustive.

Charles Matthews 08:22, 9 Nov 2003 (UTC)

 * Yes - good example - I will expand the page at some point to include this (if no-one else gets there first !). Gandalf61 08:31, Nov 9, 2003 (UTC)

Merge from Case analysis
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the concepts seem to be identical -- no reason to have two pages. I think Proof by exhaustion should be the main page (with Case analysis redirecting to it), as it is (I think) the more commonly used term, and there are more wikipedia pages linking directly to it. Dbtfz 04:35, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

 * I have a different opinion. Proof by exhaustion is a mathematical term that refers to a specific technique of mathematical proof. Case analysis is a more general term used in philosophy and logic. I think someone following the case analysis link from, for example, the article on casuistry would be surprised to find themselves in an article about mathematics. OTOH, if the proof by exhaustion article were made more general, then it would no longer match a mathematician's understanding of the term. I think the two articles should remain separate. Gandalf61 11:30, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the input, Gandalf61. You're probably right that the articles should remain separate.  I'm going to remove the reference to case analysis in the first sentence of this article, since it seems to equate case analysis with proof by exhaustion.  I'll leave the merge proposal up for a little while longer, though, just in case anyone else wants to chime in.  Dbtfz (talk - contribs) 06:01, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
 * On second thought, I'm just going to remove the merge proposal now. Dbtfz (talk - contribs) 06:04, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Comfort me!
The definition given says "...in which the statement to be proved is split into a finite number of cases...". This left me confused me because it seemed that inductive proofs dealt with infinite sets. Then I saw the proof for the modularity of cubes, illustrating exactly what I had thought. Personally I would prefer wording such as "...in which the statement to be proved is split into a finite number of cases or sets of similar cases..." It would have confused me less, and therefore I would expect it to confuse some other readers less. Any remarks? JonRichfield (talk) 15:34, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Summer Olympics
It only takes one counterexample to disprove a statement. For the statement "all Summer Olympics are held in years divisible by 4", 2020/2021 is that counterexample! Conclusion: a better example is needed. Mathmannix (talk) 14:06, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

title: Talk:Proof by exhaustion


text:
Talk:Abstract structure

Chess
''Because chess is an abstract structure, it is possible in principle to play a game of chess that is entirely mental (provided that you and your opponent have very good memories !). ''

 * Many chess grandmasters have been known to do this. It's not far-fetched. Revolver

''But the abstract structure itself is defined in a way that is not dependent on the properties of any particular implementation. ''

 * Hmmmm...me wonders. If the abstract structure is not dependent on the properties of any particular implementation, how do tell whether its an implementation or not?  It probably sounds like I'm playing devil's advocate here, but how do you "define" an abstract structure without at some point falling back upon some concrete objects in the real (or mental) world?  Take the example of a chess game and the rules of chess.  Define for me the "abstract structure" of the game of chess without eventually taking recourse to some concrete objects or concrete mental constructions?  The best way I can think to define chess is to say that it's the collection of all possible sequences of 8 x 8 matrices with entries in the set consisting of all the chess pieces from each side, and of course these pieces could be defined in terms of ordered pairs, one for colour, one for piece/pawn.  As well as the algorithm to determine whether each term in the sequence is a "legal" state for the board.  But now how do you tell that the everyday chess board we use with physical chess pieces and the rules followed by those who "know" the rules is actually isomorphic to our abstract game defined by matrices, sequences, and ordered pairs?  You do it the way mathematicians would do it as well...you set up a correspondence between pieces and parts of the "abstract structure" we defined, between moves in a game and terms of our sequence of matrices, so that everything is in 1-1 correspondence and all the rules and such are obeyed.

 * All fine...but of course the ordinary board and ordinary physical pieces are "obviously" like the sequence of 8 x 8 matrices, the correspondence is obvious. But there's another way to think of the game of chess, and that is as an infinite tree starting at a single vertex, and each edge goes to a possible legal move.  In this case, you don't even need to talk about "pieces" or "pawns" or "rules"...everything about the game of chess -- any possible playable game of chess, is included in this immense, enormous tree.  In other words, this tree MUST have the same "abstract structure" as our 2 earlier "models", the sequence of matrices, and our ordinary physical game with human players.  But the correspondence is now far from obvious, and it's not even clear what the structure is after all.  Now it seems that the real "structure" consists of an object in graph theory, and the isomorphism is set up by corresponding vertices of the directed graph to possible playable boards embedded in their previous sequence of moves.  In this way, our first (and second) example as shown to really have the same structure, because they can be given the structure of a directed graph, their vertices and directed edges can be specified, and a 1-1 correspondence between vertices and edges can be established (in theory) that shows that the vertex-edge "structure" is preserved (and this can be done in a very precise way).

 * But now have we defined the abstract structure in a way this is not dependent on the properties of any particular implementation? I don't think so, because in order to define the abstract structure, we had to define what a directed graph was, and what an isomorphism between directed graphs was.  But the most important part of all was -- in order to define the abstract structure, we had to demonstrate that there was at least one particular model (i.e. example) of our particular abstract structure; we had to point to at least one worldly case of its existence to show that it wasn't a figment of our misled imaginations.  This is where my problem with the above statement lies.  But I'm babbling. Revolver

I agree with all of the above comments up to

 * ... in order to define the abstract structure, we had to demonstrate that there was at least one particular model (i.e. example) of our particular abstract structure; we had to point to at least one worldly case of its existence to show that it wasn't a figment of our misled imaginations.

I agree that many (possibly all ?) abstract structures start out as a generalisation, abstraction or rationalisation of some real world prototype. But the abstract structure can then take on properties which can not be perfectly realised in any implementation - for example, many abstract structures in mathematics are infinite - so any proposed implementation can then only be at best an approximation to the abstract structure itself.

But I guess this leads into several other interesting questions such as what kind of 'existence' does an abstract structure have ? And how can we compare the abstract with the concrete anyway ? Gandalf61 17:04, Nov 9, 2003 (UTC)

 * I think we basically see things the same way (my posting was playing the devil's advocate a bit). I think the difference between us might be in what we consider to be an "implementation".  From the tone of the article and based on what you say above, you take a strictly physicalist interpretation of "implementation"; I take mental implementations into account as well, or at the very least, formal symbolic implementations of abstract structures.  What is the "abstract"?  My way of looking at things (and this isn't too precise, more a lifestyle choice) is that an abstract structure is not an "object" at all, it's the stuff that is "preserved" between objects (in the terminology of category theory, it's the morphisms that really count, not the objects...)  But in order to know that stuff is "preserved" (i.e. that morphisms exist) you have to know that there are things between which stuff is preserved (i.e. that objects exist).

 * I disagree that any implementation of an infinite object in math is necessarily an approximation. In fact, the axiom of infinity is meant to provide a solution to just this type of philosophical/ontological problem.  Now, one can argue that the axiom of infinity itself isn't really "an infinite object", in the sense that it consists of only a finite string of symbols, but even if you accept this, it's difficult to argue that the axiom of infinity does not meet almost all the needs mathematicians have for the use of the infinite in working mathematics (modulo various philosophical conundrums left to logicians and set theorists).  So, if one accepts say, ZFC (Zermelo-Frankel axioms plus choice) as a "physical implementation" of abstract structures, then any theory derivable from ZFC (i.e. almost all of modern math) is physically implementable (in theory), or if that seems too strong, ZFC is a physical object which appears to model infinite objects, but since a physical implementation is just a model anyways, does it matter?

 * Also, the reason I made the original posting is that such mistakes (talking about abstract structures that don't exist) have been made in the past in mathematics, or at least, similar situations have occured in which the existence of an abstract object was required to be proved. Some examples:

 * hyperbolic geometry -- Gauss and others played around with proving stuff by replacing Euclid's fifth axiom, and came up with remarkable "theorems", and so on, but none of it meant anything at all until someone produced an actual, specific model of hyperbolic geometry. If such a model did not exist, then all the "theorems" would have been vacuous.

 * the real number field -- one can axiomatically define the real numbers as the unique complete ordered field, and one can show uniqueness without worrying about existence. Then all of (real) analysis can be derived, in theory.  But what if there is no such thing as a complete ordered field?  This is the reason why the reals have to be constructed from Cauchy sequences or Dedekind cuts -- again, to make sure the concept of a "complete ordered field" isn't just something our minds have tricked us into believing exists.

 * an anecdote -- there is a famous mathematical anecdote about a ph.d. defense John Milnor attended, where the candidate gave an elaborate definition about a certain class of functions, then went on to prove lots of statements about them. At the end of the talk, Milnor supposedly (it's anecdotal) arose and proved in 5 minutes that the elaborate definition simply defined precisely the constant functions...oops.  This isn't quite the same, but the idea is...you can think you're making grand statements about abstract structures (in this case, defined by elaborate rules) but unless and until you check to see what lots of examples look like, it may all just be vacuous (or nearly vacuous, in this case). Revolver 10 Nov 2003

-

Responding to some of Revolver's comments ...

 * From the tone of the article and based on what you say above, you take a strictly physicalist interpretation of "implementation"

Yes, when I said "implementation", I should have been more specific and said "physical implementation". As you say, one abstract structure could be a (more or less faithful) implementation of another abstract structure - I suppose this would be an "abstract implementation".

 * ... none of it meant anything at all until someone produced an actual, specific model of hyperbolic geometry. If such a model did not exist, then all the "theorems" would have been vacuous.

Yes, it could have been a very complex way of describing the empty set. But it would still be an abstract structure - just not an interesting one. I was trying to avoid raising questions about whether any of these abstract structures "exist", and, if so, in what sense.

 * unless and until you check to see what lots of examples look like, it may all just be vacuous

From a practical point of view, I would agree with you. But I think an abstract structure can still be valid even if no models of it are known - and even if it is shown that there can be no models of it. Gandalf61 13:38, Nov 12, 2003 (UTC)

A bit
I think the article is a bit inexact, I try to explain in english why. Well, when we talk about algebraic structures,
 * we generally define them as a system of sets containing an "universe", and sets of relations, functions (operations).
 * So, this way of definition, a structure is a set-system of objects. This is an example for that what you call "implementation".
 * We define the relation "isomorphy" then: two structure (-implemenmtation) is isomorphyc, when we can't see a serious difference between them. A class of isomorfhic structures - sadly-badly - often called as structures, too. It sholud be called "type of structures", "structure-class" or somewhat like this.
 * This is the traditional (Bourbakist) way of definition.
 * There is an other possible approach,
 * when we call structure classes as "(abstract) structure", and a representative of a class as "representation", "implementation" etc.
 * Unfortunately, this two approach are often mixed;

So I think your approach is acceptable, but your implementation of this approach is inaccurant a bit. I can't imagine what does it mean "(any) physical object" and so on, I think your definition is not mathematical, it is too metaphysical (and quite senseless). The typic symptom of antiformalism: we throw out Bourbaki's technical and hard definitions, but can't give something better. So i think your way of thinking is acceptable, but you've formulated it into words hastily. Maybe the difference between structure representation and structure (class/type) should be mnore specific and the concept of "structure representation" would be defined too (e.g. as Bourbaki did it). The present definition is not a definition, it is roundly meaningless. Gubbubu 12:09, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * I don't think the abstract structure article is trying to provide a formal mathematical definition - it is trying to give a general sense of what the various uses of the term abstract structure in the fields of philosophy, computer science and mathematics have in common. More formal mathematical definitions are given in the algebraic structure article and other linked articles. But the term abstract structure is not confined to mathematics, so I think it is appropriate to give it this general (and perhaps less formal) treatment. Gandalf61 11:13, Dec 31, 2004 (UTC)

 * As I said, I'm satisfied with the ground conceptions of this article - more exactly, I am not fully satisfied, but it's quite right; I don't want to attack it. Only the first one or two sentences disturb me seriously: I think the expression "independently of any phisycal objects" is senseless. You hardly can define "phisycal object", but if you can, the expression "independently" would be a completely weasel term then. Gubbubu 11:30, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * Then I suggest you could either be bold and change the first few sentences in the article so that they make better sense, or propose an improved text here on the talk page if you want to solicit feedback first. Gandalf61 14:28, Jan 1, 2005 (UTC)

Like this:

An abtract structure is a class of isomorphic „concrete structures”, where
 * a concrete structure is a set of rules, properties, relationships, operations. Elements of a concrete structure can be phisycal or mental, we call it an implementation (or realisation, representant etc.) of an abstract structure.
 * isomorphy is a relation between concrete structures. We say that two structures are isomorphic, when all their important properties are the same, where important is a(n inter)subjective term for properties that are relevant to the object of examination.

For example, chess, the whole game can be considered as an abstract structure, its implementations could be whether a set of rules or an infinit directed graph, too. But a particular chess match can be considered as an abstract structure, too - in this case we must define isomorphy in an other way then we did when examined the whole game.

Mathematical system, inference rules, and references
Hello. I am trying to decipher a book by Johnsonbaugh, which at one point mentions the concept of "mathematical system", as being composed of "axioms", "definitions" and "undefined terms". It further mentions that we can "derive theorems within a mathematical system", and then goes on to talk about mathematical proofs.

I would like to know how does that relate to the concept of a formal system, where we have a formal language, axioms, and inference rules... Is a formal system just another kind of "abstract structure"? And is it a "mathematical system" too?

Is a formal system just a mathematical system where some proof techniques were transformed into mere inference rules, becoming a kind of transformational grammar? Is this separation a way to run scared from Gödel, implying that there is more to it than formal systems, and that actual mathematical proofs can't be grasped by mere inference rules?...

Where do I find a nice book defining this thing, more specifically within the context of predicate logic? -- NIC1138 (talk) 04:07, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

title: Talk:Abstract structure


text:
Gimlé

In Norse mythology, Gimlé (alternately Gimli as in Icelandic) is a place where the worthy survivors of Ragnarök are foretold to live. It is mentioned in the Prose Edda and the Eddic poem "Völuspá" and described as the most beautiful place in Asgard, more beautiful than the sun.

Etymology
The etymology of Gimli is likely "the place protected from fire" based on two Old Nordic elements : gimr "fire" and hlé "protected place".

In scholar Lee M. Hollander's view it is more likely it means "gem-roof".

Descriptions
Within Asgard, the realm of the gods, Gimlé is a golden-roofed building where righteous people go when they die. In the Prose Edda, Snorri Sturluson places it in Víðbláinn, which he describes as third heaven currently inhabited only by light elves. In "Völuspá", which he quotes in one of his accounts of Gimlé, the hall is on Gimlé, presumably a mountain, rather than being itself called Gimlé.

Snorri presents Gimlé as a pagan heaven. Scholars including Hollander and Rudolf Simek have seen the description of Gimlé as influenced by the Christian Heavenly Jerusalem. Ursula Dronke suggested that while the concept of a heaven in which "hosts" of the righteous lived together was based on the pagan Valhalla, the "Völuspá" poet or his associates invented the name "Gimlé" with reference to its protecting the blessed from the fires both of Surtr at Ragnarök and of the Christian Hell.

title: Gimlé