Talk:Roronoa Zoro

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Anime and manga (Rated C-class, Low-importance)
Wikipe-tan head.png This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anime and manga, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of anime and manga related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-class on the assessment scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.
WikiProject Fictional characters (Rated C-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fictional characters, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of fictional characters on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 

Delete/Merge[edit]

This ought to be deleted or merged with the main article.

Done. --Merovingian (t) (c) (e) 17:45, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

Why? ZORO IS COOL! The Official Zoro Lover 21:38, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Erm... You did check the date on the previous comments right? Angel Emfrbl 10:01, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Each other character has a page. Zoro's no different. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.194.7.41 (talk) 04:00, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Question[edit]

Why is Zoro listed as Zolo, yet Smoker is listed as Smoker, not as Chaser? Ken Arromdee 03:11, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

Because we are unsure of what Smoker's name will be in the English manga. If it is "Smoker", Wikipedia will call it "Smoker". Or if it's Chaser, he will be Chaser. WhisperToMe 21:06, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

I'm not positive as to the exact dub version of the "Cannon" series of attacks, since they haven't been shown, but I'm inferring it based on the translation for them in the One Piece: Grand Battle game.

-I know what you mean. The "Cannon" series can also be translated to "Phoenix" (Grand Battle using "Single Sword Rising Phoenix" and "Triple Sword Rising Phoenix") Maybe we should leave short translation notes to explain the double meanings of some attacks. Also, we should rename "Santoryu Attacks" to "Zoro's Attacks" and have Ittoryu (Single Sword), Nittoryu (Double Sword) and Santoryu (Triple Sword) as subheadings so that we can organise them better.

Ittoryu means One-Sword-Style, Nittoryu means Two-Swords-Style and Santoryu means Three-Swords-Style.

Zolo -> Zoro[edit]

I have moved this article to "Roronoa Zoro", per discussion on Talk:One Piece.

  • Why is it back to Zolo again? C Ronald 17:07, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
You are talking about something that happened months ago... It hasn't changed since the final was declared late last year. See the text in the dotted box below. We had a GREAT load of discussion about it. O.o' Angel Emfrbl 18:47, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Incriminate information[edit]

To the chap advocating the inserion, the attacks are not encyclopediac information. Place them at wikibooks and make a link from there. -ZeroTalk 12:10, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm not that much of a wikipedia editor, pretty much a newbie in editing, yet I don't see to the reason of why not put it in the encyclopedia, since wikibooks is meant for manuals and the likes.
Since the attacks are mainly useless trivia, yet it is extremely longer than the rest of the trivia section.

For that one reason, and the lack of counter reasons, I believe it deserves it's own 'Attacks' section. After it is actually written, meaning someone worked hard to write all of it, I even see kind of rude.

There's nothing rude about it. If you don't want your writing to be edited mercilessly or redistributed by others, do not submit it. You previously just noted yourself that it is useless trivia. Useless trivia = indescriminate information. And that is not permitted on wikipedia. That's why it's unsuitible. If this were permitted, then every fighting character article would recieve a list of attacks too. Please don't insist on the insertion of this information, and I'd also politley ask that you cease in removing the history section, which is the focus point in this article(s). If it must be included, place it at wikibooks and use the {{wikibooks}} syntax-ZeroTalk 12:30, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

It isn't very important, but still, how much of anything is that important? Anyhow, thank you for telling me this. Now that I know the wikipedia rules, I'll try not to make mistakes on that scale. Yet, I will ask, is it allowed to open a new page, with a character's attacks, a page to which I will link from the character's page? On the other part, I haven't, not once, have deleated the history section. I have actually written a small part of Franky's history, some of my first edits, and have reinserted the once removed history section in Monkey D. Luffy. (Kurigiri 13:09, 6 May 2006 (UTC))

Ah, I see. It must have been an anonymous IP's deletion of the history earlier, and that got merged in when you made your edit. Do you need any assistance with linking to wikibooks..? I'll do it for you if you like.-ZeroTalk 13:12, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

So far I have only known wikipedia and wikiquote, so the mere exsitance of wikibooks is all I know. I would very much appreciate some help, if it is not much of a bother. (Kurigiri 13:17, 6 May 2006 (UTC))

Okay. Here is the link to the wikibooks page:
That link was created by me typing in the template syntax of {{wikibooks|Character attacks from One Piece}}. For more information on liking to wikibooks, you also might take a glance at Template:wikibooks. From there, I transferred the attacks of the Straw Pirates, and then made a link to wikipedia from there, essentially vice-versa. This is called a transwiki. If you come across any other One Piece character articles that need a transwiki, just follow that, and give me a shout if you still feel confused. -ZeroTalk 13:59, 6 May 2006 (UTC)


Ok, I think I understand.. I have also inserted Usopp's attacks in there and linked to his wikipedia page. But all the links to the wikipedia pages were turned into wikibooks links, to articles who don't exist. Is there a fast way turn all of them back into wikipedia links? (Kurigiri 15:27, 6 May 2006 (UTC))

Whenever you wish to link to another page in a sister wiki project you insert a letter syntax proceeding the link. In the case of wikipedia place W: before the page name to link. See the sister link section for more information. -ZeroTalk 15:40, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm Sorry, but I have to disagree with you guys, I've been a die-hard One Piece fan ever since the show was created and I strongly beieve that a character's attacks are as much a part of any One Piece character's info as anything, and in responce to the earlier comment about how every fighting character would have an attack list if attack were that important, my friends and I fully intend to give each fighting character his or her own attack list in due time. If you guys insist on creating a wikibooks page for attacks that's your choice and I'd be glad to help you keep the lists up-to-date, but my friends and I have worked very had to write those attack lists as accurately and clearly as possible and would appreciate them being left on the character page. P.S I did not mean to delete any of the character's history sections, but if I accidentally did I sincerely apologise. (KingKogs, 6 May 2006 (GMT))

... Again, "If you don't want your writing to be edited mercilessly or redistributed by others, do not submit it." Attack lists are aboslutely useless to a general audience. How, again, does a generic Japanese word improve a general reader's understanding of the character that cannot be by "This character uses swords!" ' (Feeling chatty? ) (Edits!) 05:47, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Now wait just a minute. There no harm in including the attacks list and they were moved to a seperate page to keep thing from being crowded and it makes the characters more interesting. Not to mention there just an important part of the series as the characters themselves. As for "useless information to the general audiences", your wrong there my friend. Audiences may know the usual Gum Gum stuff, but what about Zoro Santoryu or Sanji's french attacks they use in the manga not to mention the confusion that may stem if people wonder whats the difference between the edited TV version and the almost unedited manga. Am not saying there no law against editing them but I too have to disagree with this deletion. Useless infomation? Hardly.-User talk:Retro7

I have editted the Santoryu artical that contains Zoro's attacks. Mabey there should be a link to that artical for info about his attacks, and info on his attack list, since the Santoryu artical is about his attacks. The artical needs alot more work, though. I, also, am perplexed on why the artical should only appeal to a general audience. Why can't it appeal to a general audience and the people wanting to know detailed information about Zoro? Besides that, Santoryu is a big part of Zoro's character anatomy, anyway. Anyone wanting to know anything about Zoro should also be aware of his Santouryuu.

Bounty not appearing[edit]

I don't know about anyone else, butZoro's bounty isn't showing.

  • On the subject of his bounty, it says that he got a 60,000,000 beri bounty after defeating Mr.1. This is untrue, from what I know, he got that bounty after it was learned that he defeated 100 bounty hunters at Wiskey Peak, not because he defeated Mr.1. That is information I was given, anyway.
Both. The reason he got the 60 million bounty was because he defeated Mr. 1 and because he defeated 100 bounty hunters in Wiskey Peak. Regardless, both Luffy and Zoro got thier bounties after the Alabasta Arc (About the time they left the castle). --Guille2015 03:34, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

This is ridiculous[edit]

To change the entire article into Roronoa Zolo? That is over-doing it. Although this is the american wikipedia, that does not change the fact that Zoro is a japanese character, whose name is Roronoa Zoro. The fact that he is known in the states as Zolo should, and have, been mentioned in the article, but his name is still Zoro.

I suggest a revert.

On another matter, Louisng114, doing a major change like this without discussing it first, is a problem of it's own. If you can, win an argument, convince pepole your opinion is correct, than change the article with an overall agreement. Don't just change it out of the blue. Kurigiri 18:06, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

I agree with Kurigiri. There are many people that feel that the name should be written as Zolo and others as Zoro. Besides, changing pages out of the blue might cause linking problems.--Guille2015 19:51, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

I don't get it. Why change Zoro to Zolo? I mean no one's changed Smoker to Chaser, or Ace to Trace. Or whatever else.--Yashouzoid

Paranoid lawsuits that's why, that is why the change had to be done. 24.188.203.181 05:12, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm aware of why 4Kids changed it. I'm referring to why someone changed it on Wikipedia. --Yashouzoid

If it was changed to Zolo then there would be a massive rewrite of everything into the dub versions. And then it would all be "He ____ then ___ but in the original anime he _____ then _____" for every sentence. 58.105.132.61 06:12, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

The thing is, this whole thing has been discussed before. The discussion actually lasted over a year: [1]. The fact is, the article should be named "Roronoa Zolo". As WhisperToMe has said, both the English manga and anime currently use the spelling "Roronoa Zolo". The reason why no one's moved Smoker to Chaser or Ace to Trace is because the manga doesn't use those names. Wikipedia's naming conventions state to use the most official English source for a name, which is the English manga in this case. The fact is that, while he's known as Roronoa Zoro in Japan, he's known as Roronoa Zolo in every single English-speaking country. It was written best like this:
"We are dealing with the English language Wikipedia, so we must deal with the Anglicized spellings of words. If the official English releases of this product have changed their original spelling of Zoro to Zolo, then the English Wikipedia article should list Zolo. The best solution, though, is to simply explain the whole situation in the article. But, if you want to actually name the article, I would go with the current official English spelling, which apparently is Zolo. Such an article would start 'Zolo, originally known as Zoro', or something along those lines." — 0918BRIAN • 2006-03-4 00:19
That's why the article needs to be Roronoa Zolo. -The Splendiferous Gegiford 01:33, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
So long as we all know who he is... Thats my view. Angel Emfrbl 08:18, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
In closing, we could not have started the un-dubing of the One Piece articles once and for all with out you Geg! Ironic how your trying to move this page was your own downfall. If you never tried to move this page, this would have gone on until one side gave up, and the policy would still have that loophole. In trying to destroy us, you gave us our greatest weapon. Thank you.
10/10. 203.218.26.164 (talk) 19:16, 23 December 2007 (UTC)


In my opinion, the aim of Wikipedia's manga/anime articles are to inform the readers of the original standards of all the mangas/animes mentioned. You don't see Smoker's article changed to Chaser or Ace to Trace. It would be suitable to say "Roronoa Zoro, known in the US, UK, etc. as Zolo" but don't change the entire article. At the bottom of the page in the extended links, there is a mistake as well: "Luffy (Ruffy) | Zolo (Zoro)." Ruffy does not need to be in there because the official spelling of the name (Luffy) was written out by the writer of One Piece, Eiichiro Oda. Zoro is also his original spelling. We can inform the readers of the english dub edits, but do not change the whole article. Signed TBB529

Baratie arc fight[edit]

Should we write about Zoro's fight with Mihawk? It's was an major turning point for Zoro's development. I believe that earns it a place in the History section. (Kurigiri 07:51, 31 July 2006 (UTC))

Johnny and Yosaku[edit]

Zoro has a deep friendship with his bounty hunting partners, and not a single time has their name appear on his article?

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was NO CONSENSUS TO MOVE, per discussion below. -GTBacchus(talk) 09:48, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Requested move[edit]

Roronoa ZoroRoronoa Zolo – Name change as per the official English manga and anime for One Piece. While "Zoro" is the character's officially romanized name in Japan, all officially published English materials spell the name "Zolo". The Splendiferous Gegiford 20:50, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Okay... This is getting us no where... NEW APPROACH! List reasons for either name please! No discussions, theres a section for it below all this. I'm sick of us going round in circles. This idea is simple, just list all the reason for EITHER name. I'm trying to get us away from a big fight here. Angel Emfrbl 21:16, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Arguments in support of moving to "Roronoa Zolo"[edit]

  • All English media and games in the United States, Canada, England, and Australia call him Zolo
  • Other manga and anime articles, such as articles for Yu-Gi-Oh!, Yu-Gi-Oh! GX, Zatch Bell!, and Naruto, have adjusted the titles of their articles to fit with changing official English translations despite popular opinion, setting a precedent.
  • Status of the Singapore English dub is unclear as of this discussion

Arguments against moving to "Roronoa Zolo"[edit]

  • Zoro is the name used in Singapore's English dub.
  • All Japanese media and games, including the series's author Eiichiro Oda, romanize his name as Zoro.
  • "Zoro" is the more popular of the two names among fans of One Piece.
  • Hepburn romanization, the Wikipedia standard according to WP:MOS-JP, results in Zoro.
  • Other manga articles, such as the articles for Sailor Moon and Inuyasha, use the original names, setting a precedent.
  • Wikipedia:WikiProject Anime and Manga states "Name your pages in English and place the native transliteration on the first line of the article unless the native form is more commonly used in English than the English form."
  • It also states "Characters should be called what the series officially states their romaji names as. If that does not exist, use what they are named in the most recent or popular English translation, if it exists, isn't egregiously bad, and is the generally-used name (a google test is appropriate here). Otherwise, use a literal transliteration." Zoro dominates the Google test by a factor of somewhere between 2 and 8 to 1, depending on the precise terms used. (Many fans also agree that the 4kids dub is egregiously bad.)
  • There is more than one source of English favoring Zoro over Zolo. The common English rule apparently applies to all sources of a term, not just what is solely written in the all official English publisized works such as Viz and 4kids.
  • The new wording of Wikipedia's Anime and Manga naming policy, due to a massive loophole, proves that this is the version that is that must because of the evidence submitted. [2]

Survey[edit]

Add "* Support" or "* Oppose" followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your opinion with ~~~~
Comment I'm adding this up here so that an admin reading all this won't have to sift through all that discussion. When you're looking at "commonly used" you can look at it this way: You have one name, "Zoro", which the vast majority of One Piece fans use. You have another name, "Zolo", which all official English One Piece media use (manga, anime, etc). The main question I'm asking with this move request is what counts more when determining usage: Fans or publishers? If it's decided that the fans count more and the article name is kept, then I'm fine with that. I just want to know what the Wikipedia policy makers have to say about it. The Splendiferous Gegiford 17:15, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

  • Oppose. Both have been used in english, however the Japanese romanization better reflects the original intention; that his name be a reference to Zorro. See also all the reasons I gave in the discussion section below. --tjstrf 20:55, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
Comment. The goal of Wikipedia isn't to "reflect the original intentions" of anything. All that can still be noted in the article even with the title as "Zolo". This was a comment given by Brian0918 on the One Piece talk page, which I agree with:
"My opinion is this: we are dealing with the English language Wikipedia, so we must deal with the Anglicized spellings of words. If the official English releases of this product have changed their original spelling of Zoro to Zolo, then the English Wikipedia article should list Zolo. The best solution, though, is to simply explain the whole situation in the article. But, if you want to actually name the article, I would go with the current official English spelling, which apparently is Zolo. Such an article would start "Zolo, originally known as Zoro", or something along those lines."
The Splendiferous Gegiford 21:10, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Support - While I wish that the name is still "Zoro", I know that we have to reflect the fact that, right now, it is "Zolo" WhisperToMe 23:07, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Support the policy is to use the official English name. TJ Spyke 01:05, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose The Dub put out by 4kids is not the only English dub, there is a also Singaporian dub that uses "Zoro". Remember, this is the ENGLISH Wikipedia, not the AMERICAN Wikipedia. Justyn 12:43AM PST, 9/14/06
  • Oppose - Zoro should be Zoro. It has been used by fans long before any Official "American" English version came out and it is still being used even to this day for several reasons, a majority of them being 4kids related.CalicoD.Sparrow 16:04, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose: In light of recent edits to pages. On my now lost and confused state of mind on which correct term we should be using everywhere. I'm going to take a side now. My opinion is this... The dub uses incorrect names for many things such as Mole Mole Fruit, Merman and many many others.... Our verison, although is the offical English dub, is an incorrect translation of the orginal series and can not be relied upon regurdless of what is said. Wikipedia is a place where the correct information is suppose to be supplied... So here we have a problem with Publisher Vs Correctness more then Fan Vs publisher. When in doubt... Turn to the orginal source, the Japanese manga because its the orginal and correct verison and therefore overturns any mistranslations made by the English dub. Angel Emfrbl 18:09, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
Comment: One Piece is not the only manga/dub to have ever had names and terms changed. The Splendiferous Gegiford 18:34, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
Reply. Of course not. But just because other series have the same problems doesn't make it any more acceptable. --tjstrf 18:43, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
Reply: So what makes One Piece an exception, then? The Splendiferous Gegiford 18:46, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
Reply That we can prevent the problem in this case. --tjstrf 18:55, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Support Fans should not dictate how articles are named on Wikipedia. If the most common English source uses a spelling that is different from the original Japanese source, then the English source should be used. This is what {{nihongo}} is for. Ryūlóng 04:27, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose No reason to change it, especially due to Wikipedia.s policy dictating the use of native names vs. English adaptation names. Since Zoro is far more used on the internet, it should stay Zoro. Frankly, the efforts by some to sweep this anime's section of Wikipedia and "dubbify" it is strange, at best... Lordshmeckie 05:52, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
Reply Not to mention impossible, since the dub doesn't actually exist for half the series. --tjstrf 05:57, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
Reply: No one's making any attempts to make the articles look like the dub. All that's being done is changing Japanese terms to English. In the English Wikipedia. My, fancy that. The Splendiferous Gegiford 06:07, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
Reply: You are the only one so far in the past few days that is doing exactly that. Changing Gedatsu to Gedatz, Kohza to Koza. Many of these, only have 4kids source and no Viz source.CalicoD.Sparrow 07:21, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
Reply': Yes, indeed. Every time I see a edit from Japanese to English its by you Geg and its in deed just that. Aside from the odd people changing stuff like Merry Go to Going Merry and so on no one else is doing any name changes. Angel Emfrbl 07:48, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
Reply: None of them have a Japanese source either. They're fan translations. The Splendiferous Gegiford 16:14, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
Reply: Fan translations based on the katakana. You conveniently left that out. (Justyn 07:24, 18 September 2006 (UTC))
Reply:I'd just to point out, these translations are often far more accurate then the English Dub. So, do we go for a dub name which is wrong but offical in the english media or a translation thats the correct translation of the Japanese? Angel Emfrbl 07:48, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
Reply: I see you people don't quite understand how translation works. If you're going to say every name should be written as the katakana, then why aren't you writing Pell's name as "Peru"? Or Cobra's name as "Kobura"? Or Lucci's name as "Lucchi". Don't pick and choose which names to translate and which names to not translate. The Splendiferous Gegiford 13:29, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
Reply: No one is talking about using katakana here!! Pell is Pell, because it is both the most popular name and thankfully in an English adaptation. You however, seem to harbor presumably LARGE grudge against Japanese and Fan translations. As long as it has a source in an English medium, whether it is just 4kids or Viz, you apparently change it to that on the mere basis that it is "English". If you're gonna do things like that, at least have a more stable reason for doing that!! Change terms and names that have both have a 4kids and Viz source. Don't just use one, use both!!!CalicoD.Sparrow 15:05, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
Reply: "No one is talking about using katakana here!!" Justyn and Angel Emfrbl were. Anyway, fan translations don't belong in Wikipedia because they're fan translations. It's best to have some kind of official English name used, even if it's from 4Kids. Just because Kaizoku Fansubs never used "Gedatz" as a translation doesn't mean it's not a perfectly genuine translation. The Splendiferous Gegiford 17:14, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
Reply *sigh* here we go again... Can't we stick to Zoro Vs Zolo? Also, Geg your forgetting the Japanese do know what ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ are and they DO spell certain characters names in english... Either in the video games or the manga or the anime. So *Some* aren't translations... Some are the names and how they were spelt by the Japanese when they did use english. A few of those recently got changed by you. I'm not saying which because with all the edits I've forgotten them, all I know is they have and I noted it when it did. Which is one half of my confusion right now with names. Angel Emfrbl 18:02, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
Reply Were they the names that were written in English in that video game? If so, I think it was the fans' own decision not to use names. For example, Eneru's name was written as "Enel" but the people here chose to keep it as "Eneru" anyway despite the spelling in the game. Wasn't Franky's name spelled as Flanky as well? If it was from the actual anime/manga, then please try to direct me to which names they are. I haven't finished watching the series all the way through yet. The Splendiferous Gegiford 18:28, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
Reply Again the Japanese are not english, they know it but they don't speak it natively. Mistakes do happen... As for the games, look on the consoles games page and tell me, how many games do you see? A lot, without going through EVERY game you can't see what they are written as. I know the Flanky one because I've seen the introduction of the said game it came from, I know 'Zoro' is also 'Zoro' for the same reason, I've seen the endings and bits in the games where they are mentioned. I can't point you out to some charactes though because my Japanese is limited so I can't play any of the games well enough to find out all the characters see what they are written as. All I can ensure you is that somewhere along the lines, many characters are written down in a video game or a media related game (normally on their Vs screen or player select).
Geg, I know your sticking by your argument still and I admire you for doing so, but until you've seen these things you can dictate such things. If you've seen the Japanese games, seen the Japanese manga (there are english spellings in there) or anime (there in there too) and then the Viz and 4Kids translations then you know what names are best in these sort of discussions. As for why I don't just point out some things and end this discussion... There are 400 chapters... 200+ episodes... Many games... Long story short... It takes a while to find these things. (You need all day to look up things from the manga...) Angel Emfrbl 18:58, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Wikipedia policy is that *commonly used* names are to be used--not *official* names. This is a case where the most commonly used name is not the official one. Furthermore, as other people have pointed out, there are non-American official English versions that do use "Zoro". Ken Arromdee 18:55, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
Reply: There's one. That's a small dub in Singapore versus a dub and English manga in the United States, Canada, England, and Austrailia. Looking at it from that way, it's pretty obvious which one's used more commonly in English.The Splendiferous Gegiford 20:05, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
Reply. Ignoring what Oda says, and the first edition Viz work, of course. --tjstrf 20:12, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
Reply. As I said, Oda is not an official English version. It basically comes down to this: The most commonly used official English name is Zolo. The most commonly used unofficial English name (Oda's words are only canon/official for the Japanese version of the series) is Zoro. The Splendiferous Gegiford 20:20, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
You have a weird definition of "official" if you think the author isn't an official source. (I would call him THE official source.) At any rate, I think we've run out of original arguments here. How much longer does this have to stay open, again? --tjstrf 20:53, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
Oda is the official source for names for the Japanese version. The official source for names for the English version is Viz. It comes down to:

Official Names in English-speaking countries
Zoro
Singapore (though not national language)

Zolo
United States
Canada
England
Austraila

Of course, if you look at "common usage" as how popular the name is among fans, then it's Zoro. If you look at "common usage" as how often each name is used in English media, it's pretty obviously Zolo. The Splendiferous Gegiford 21:01, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
Reply: Proof about the Zoro thing... If I could find the link I'd show you the Flanky one... This could take me a while... Or not depending. http://www.bandaigames.channel.or.jp/list/ps2_one_rush/chara.html Angel Emfrbl 19:27, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Lo0hK9Y-jE There you go. Flanky. Its only in the introduction. Angel Emfrbl 19:34, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
I support moving to Roronoa Zolo too - I do not know if Singapore's version is still in production anyway. WhisperToMe 21:30, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Discussion[edit]

Add any additional comments

A note to editors: Remember that consensus is not how many votes one side has. No matter how many "oppose" or "supports" there are, the page will be moved depending on which side has the best arguement.
With that out of the way, one of the things I wanted to challenge with this move request was whether or not using the Japanese name if it is used more than the anglicized version even applies to manga/anime articles. On the Wikipedia:Naming conventions (use English) page, the example of Turin vs. Torino is given. The example gives that many US newspapers use Torino, while others use Turin. Looking at it from that way, I don't see why the rule would apply to this, as, while Zoro is more commonly used by familiar fans of the series, if for whatever reason a magazine or newspaper were to publish a story on One Piece, it would most likely use the English spelling "Zolo". The Splendiferous Gegiford 21:06, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

When this is over, I'll write up a discussion result on the newly written bit on the One Piece discussion page: Talk:One_Piece#One_Piece_terms_usage so we can see which name to use. I hope everyone doesn't mind me doing this, this is for future benefit to all One Piece wikipedia Pages. Angel Emfrbl 19:04, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
"Best argument" over the most "yay"s or "nay"s?! So, basically, your argument, right? The policy is what it is, no matter how set you and WhisperToMe are to changing things to 4Kids and Viz's versions, the majority of anime articles on large, popular series continue to use the original, Japanese terminology over the English adaptations. So, honestly, this whole argument is pointless, to me. I cannot fathom why we're even discussing this...Lordshmeckie 02:57, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Actualy, I myself have seen AMERICAN ENGLISH publications write his name as "Zoro".Justyn

Comment So, are we planning on moving Smoker to Chaser if this move goes through? --tjstrf 21:26, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

No, as the English manga uses "Smoker" as well. The Splendiferous Gegiford 21:32, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
"English name: Roronoa Zoro in U.S. manga chapter 1-49 first printing..."
Also, from WP:ANIME: "Article introductions should be primarily about the first format of a work (usually manga) and not about the most popular format of that work (usually anime)." --tjstrf 21:38, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, this is why Smoker is used rather than Chaser. About Roronoa Zoro being in the first printing, the fact that they've changed since then makes the difference. Like how Maito Gai was changed to Might Guy after Viz started using that name for him. The Splendiferous Gegiford 21:44, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

I don't know if this helps the argument to keep it as it is, but "Roronoa Zoro" gets 86,700 hits on google while "Roronoa Zolo" gets only 945. I would say to use the most used name. Nemu 21:35, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

True, though Zoro One Piece causes 243,000 hits while Zolo One Piece causes 115,000 hits. It's still more, but not as one-sided. The Splendiferous Gegiford 21:44, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
Fans from forums and such tend to use the orginal Japanese names for stuff, hence the high no. of hits... In fact using words such as 'Cursed Fruits' is shunned upon. I think I prefer Zoro too to Zolo, but I'm not going to side with either. Angel Emfrbl 21:52, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
Yes, Angel has a point there. Another rather humorous thing about Googling Roronoa Zolo is how many of the hits (in the later pages) are people griping about the change. --tjstrf 22:03, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
However the English-language manga uses "Devil Fruit", so... WhisperToMe 02:44, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
Personnelly, I don't see the problem so long as there is a redirect between either one. Most people googling one or the other will know their one and the same, it shouldn't be too different here either on Wikipedia. Angel Emfrbl 22:07, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Comment: I guess it's worth noting that Roronoa Zoro is the only remaining article that keeps the Japanese name where there's a difference between the Japanese manga and the English manga. Others have been changed to fit the manga, like Merry Go and Roguetown. The Splendiferous Gegiford 22:37, 13 September 2006 (UTC)


Smoker still has his Japanese name... The thing about the change to Rogue town though is that Logue town has a meaning (its from Prologue and epilogue)... Zoro and Zolo are the same either way. Angel Emfrbl 22:48, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
Like I said, Smoker's used because that's the name used in the English manga. The Splendiferous Gegiford 22:58, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
This is primarily due to your own edits, Gegiford. Many fo the other pages already had the names Oda originally gave the characters.Lordshmeckie 18:03, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
Not only me. WhisperToMe as well. Besides, all I'm trying to do is get the One Piece articles uniform with other anime articles. Take Naruto for example. A while back, all the articles went through a revamp to fit with the English dub and manga. Compared to that, One Piece's articles are still stuck in the past. The Splendiferous Gegiford 18:11, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
You and WhisperToMe seem to be the main/only "champions" of this "cause", for lack of more convenient terminology. Personally, I thought WTM gave up after Wikipedia's anime policy. As for being "stuck in the past", many other anime sections, such as Inuyasha and Dragonball Z, retain usage of the original, Japanese terminology, with clarification within the article (i.e. what they're referred to in the English dub). This usage being outdated, or the result of "whiny fanboys", is merely your own, personal conjecture, and not any kind of definitive rule or truth. What IS, however, is the Wikiepdia policy I have cited to you on multiple occasions, which the One Piece section follows just fine, without the need for alterations to fit any English adaptations.Lordshmeckie 05:18, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
While I don't like to side with these kind of arguments, some things Lordshmeckie have raised are notable. The Japanese terminology has its uses, often dubs remove or change things and its nice to know WHAT the orginal reference was, like turning mole mole fruit in digging digging fruit and calling the animal you change into into a groundhog. Fans such as myelf like to see these kind of things written on the page (which the last few days keep getting removed). Having the term doesn't result instantly in a 'stuck in the past' wikipedia page, wikipedia pages hold information and act as encyclpedia, therefore the terms have a place as information. The only time we can draw a line as to other language terms is when they AREN'T in enlgish nor Japanese, but rather other language like German (they should be on their respective pages and not on the english one).
However, we still are missing a point... This is a character here who is known by either name and that it ISN'T so important which name he is known by, so long as there is a redirect between the two names. In the end it all comes down to fan taste, orginal names and whether to use the dubbed name. Angel Emfrbl 07:41, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
Like I said, I wanted to decide if the actual fans of a series dictate how a name is used in Wikipedia. Wikipedia is supposed to be written objectively, so that someone who knows nothing on a subject would be able to stop and read it. With that in mind, would the fans, who already know everything about the series, dictate common usage, or would it have to be something else? The Splendiferous Gegiford 13:40, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
The fans are the ones who would know enough about the series to update WIkipedia's One Piece section in the first place. That's something to consider. Also, before certain people began altering all the information to suit the English adaptations, every page included what things were changed to in the English adaptations, which would show newcomers familiar only with the dub or English manga what the things they're familiar with originally were. I think it's only fair to abide by what the creator of the subject has dictated something to be, rather than an outside party. Lordshmeckie 23:47, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Another thing that is needs to be addressed is that there is a Singaporian ENGLISH dub of One Piece that uses "Zoro". And, if asked, will link to multiple videos that prove this. Because this is an ENGLISH Wikipedia, and not the AMERICAN Wikipedia, this needs to be given some weight. Also on Google and Zoro, when you search for "Roronoa Zolo", Google comes back asking "Do you mean 'Roronoa Zoro'?".Justyn 12:35AM PST, 9/14/06

Out of all the dubs in English speaking countries and countries that base their dub on the 4Kids dub, only one uses Zoro.The Splendiferous Gegiford 13:45, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not based 100% on dub information, it is also based on what the character is better known as, I looked on deviantART and searched for "Roronoa Zolo", and "Roronoa Zoro", My results:

  • "Roronoa Zolo" 158 hits, 63 of those where calling him Zoro, and just addding the tag "Zolo" to get more hits, or some said Zolo in digussion. Total 95
  • "Roronoa Zoro" 1026 hits, ALL of which using Zoro. Total 1026

I also searched Fanfiction.net and my results where similar:

  • Serched entire site for "Zolo", 64 hits.
  • Serched entire site for "Zoro", 523 hits

MediaMiner, a smaller Fanfiction archive was serched, 114 stories in the One Piece, many of which Crossovers... or.. things that are... not "family friendly".

  • Zoro: 23
  • Zolo: 2 (yes, two hits)

So, Zoro: 1572 hits Zolo: 123 hits

Pretty obvious which one wins, huh? Justyn 8:07AM PST, 9/14/06.

One of the points I was trying to make is whether or not that rule really applies to anime and manga article. Of course, he's known as Zoro more by fans of the series. However, what I want to know is who really counts when determining this, fans of the series or mainstream media? The Splendiferous Gegiford 16:03, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
Well, could look at this way... Until the 4Kids verison came out, everywhere more or less used Zoro and the only thing that was changed was his family name. But SINCE then the english media (including english dub games and now Viz too) use Zolo. This isn't a question therefore of fan Vs dub name... But whether to use the orginal name or the 'updated' (sorry I couldn't think how else to desrcibe it) name 4Kids and other since then have used. Angel Emfrbl 16:49, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

What does Hepburn say? Because that's what the MOS recommends for general Wikipedia use, and use in case of conflicts between the other rules. --tjstrf 17:26, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Hepburn's only for romanization and not actual naming, though, isn't it? The Splendiferous Gegiford 18:05, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
No, actually. From the WP:MOS-JA:
Article titles should follow all of the points <instructions on how Hepburn romanization is done> above, with the following exceptions:
Article titles should omit apostrophes after syllabic n.
Article titles should use macrons except in cases where the macronless spelling is in common usage in English-speaking countries (e.g., Tokyo, Osaka, Sumo and Shinto, instead of Tōkyō, Ōsaka, Sumō and Shintō).
Where macrons are used in the title, an appropriate redirect using the macronless spelling should also be created which points to the actual title (e.g., Tessho Genda pointing to Tesshō Genda).
The rules are, however, self-contradictory in this case, as they actually say "use hepburn", "use official name", and "use most common" at different points. However, I believe that Zoro's status as being the Hepburn romanization, the most common, and an official name is compelling. In other words, Zoro is the correct name according to 2.5 of the 3 criteria. --tjstrf 18:16, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
I don't really think that applies to fictional characters whose names are already given, though. It'd be like moving Monkey D. Luffy to Monkī D. Rufi. (edit) Found it, right here: For Japanese words in katakana, use the English spelling if available (i.e., Thunderbird (サンダーバード Sandābādo) instead of Sandābādo). The Splendiferous Gegiford 18:21, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Also noting that if the move goes through, it's not the only article on Wikipedia to have names unpopular with fans. Most Yu-Gi-Oh! fans use "Malik Ishtar" rather than "Marik Ishtar". Most Naruto fans use "Maito Gai" rather than "Might Guy". Though it should also be noted that Kazuki Takahashi never wrote out Marik's name in romaji, and Masashi Kishimoto actually wrote out the name "Might Guy", whereas Eiichiro Oda has always written out "Zoro". Though as I've said, this is to determine the English name based on official English publications, not Japanese ones. The Splendiferous Gegiford 18:21, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

The Might Guy case actually supports the use of Zoro, as it is a case of the author's official spelling being used. (It's also a case of the name's original intention as a reference/pun being kept.) There are more guidelines supporting Zoro than Zolo, and I don't see any place in the manual that states one guideline supercedes another. The multiple guidelines on this do make it confusing, but the rules more consistently point to Zoro than Zolo.

I personally prefer the Hepburn rule because Hepburn spelling won't change, while even official spellings can be transient, as happened in this case. In other words, Hepburn meets the encyclopedic characteristic of timelessness. But I really don't care enough to argue over this any more. --tjstrf 18:39, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Just noting that Maito Gai was only moved to Might Guy because that's the name the manga started using. Kishimoto writing it that way had nothing to do with the move. The Splendiferous Gegiford 18:51, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
So the move didn't take place in a timely fashion then. Should have happened when he first romanized it. The reason the manga changed it in the first place is obviously because that's how the author wrote it. --tjstrf 18:56, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

The whole "Zolo" thing looks to me like one big lame excuse 4kids uses in order to market the character without the troublesome lawsuits that would likely follow. Seriously, it's like they want to please everyone at the cost of fans of the original. Censor Mihawk's crosses so not to offend Christians. Censor Miss Merry Christmas' name so not to offend Non-Christians. If they were the ones handling the situation with middle eastern terrorism, the US would have an Islamic state that doesn't worship their religion.

I know the quality of a dub does not dictate the layout of Wikipedia. However, it is an indirect factor. It's sloppy and horrible job of doing things makes people shun its version and insist of using the original version. With the more ussage of the original than the dub, the original has come to be a staple in the Internet. This would more or less affect Wikipedia, especially if it has a policy that the most commonly used Anime term should use.

Wikipedia as I have come to know, is a great source of information. However, if it insists on using Anime terms simply because they are English and not because they are the most common used in a media that it belongs to, especially when has that policy, then it is just as sloppy and narrow viewed as that bloody dub.

So use Zoro instead of Zolo, because it is the most common one. If you don't want to, take down that policy immediately. It serves no purpose for a domain that can't follow its own rules.CalicoD.Sparrow 16:40, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

You're forgetting that this is not only 4Kids but Viz as well. You can point out the flaws in 4Kids's dub all you want, but it isn't going to change the fact that all official English media except for a small dub in Singapore uses the name "Zolo". Besides, talking about policies, there are more policies for using English names than not using English names. The only policy keeping this one as "Zoro" is the policy about names being used more often, which I'm calling into question here. When you're looking at "commonly used" you can look at it this way: You have one name, "Zoro", which the vast majority of One Piece fans use. You have another name, "Zolo", which all official English One Piece media use (manga, anime, etc). The main question I'm asking with this move request is what counts more when determining usage: Fans or publishers? If it's decided that the fans count more and the article name is kept, then I'm fine with that. I just want to know what the Wikipedia policy makers have to say about it.The Splendiferous Gegiford 17:04, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
Those media are a result of 4kids' dub. In fact, it has been repeatedly mentioned that Viz uses "Zolo" now in order to coincide with the dub.

4kids and Viz flaws aside, the policy about keeping the names based on common use in the net seems plausible enough. The Policy seems to take into account that Wikipedia is in territory where they are probably more people who chose different terms than what is set in stone. Also as far as I see, Wikipedia is in free territory. If it chooses to use common names over official English standards, then let it. If it chooses otherwise, then let it. It is an English website not an American one so whatever policies it applies or changes is by it's own accord. I'll stand by that policy until it gets change. I'll also state that while the policy contradicts other policies in Wikipedia about naming stuff, it is in a completely different category from them. In fact, this is probably why the whole anime policies were made in the first place. All of the anime articles would completely violate those other policies if they didn't have a different set of policies to govern them.CalicoD.Sparrow 18:24, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, that rule was probably put into place just so that anime articles could be considered "good". There are so many anime articles that it'd be very difficult to get them all uniform to Wikipedia's English policies. Though I don't see what this not being an American Wikipedia has to do with anything. Viz's manga and 4Kids's dub are in more English countries than just America. The Splendiferous Gegiford 03:43, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
Geg, you refuse to see that iron clad evadence has been presented that proves that "Zoro" is the more popular term, and under Wikipedia's policy, this means that "Zoro" is the term that should be used, this was the same way that "Going Merry" was put in it's rightful place. And, the 4kids dub is not the ONLY official English dub, the one in Singapore, although not much better, is an official dub. But if you need MORE evadence...

On Google:
"Roronoa Zoro": 83,700 hits.
"Roronoa Zolo": 919 hits.

Need MORE? (Justyn 05:41, 17 September 2006 (UTC))

And you're not reading half the discussion. There are several different interpretations of that rule. As Ryulong said, it's also interpreted as the what spelling the most common English source uses, not the fans. That's what I'm hoping the closing administrator could shed some light on. The Splendiferous Gegiford 06:05, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
Geg, you're not even following what he says either. You insist on using the less common English terms on the most common English source, THE NET.CalicoD.Sparrow 07:20, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
The internet is not English. The Splendiferous Gegiford 16:15, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
Also, Geg, have you read the policy here? It clearly state that if the native version of a name is in more common use than the official english version, that the native version is what should be used. (Justyn 08:26, 17 September 2006 (UTC))
That's the rule I've been talking about the whole time. Read the discussion. The Splendiferous Gegiford
We are speaking of the policy that directs to this problem, and it agrees with those of us that agree with Zoro [[3]]
"That's the rule I've been talking about the whole time. Read the discussion." The Splendiferous Gegiford 22:08, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
"Name your pages in English and place the native transliteration on the first line of the article unless the native form is more commonly used in English than the English form. See: WP:NAME"
Yep, that one. --tjstrf 22:26, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
"That's the rule I've been talking about the whole time. Read the discussion." The Splendiferous Gegiford 00:00, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
I have. Your only defense against that argument is that "people have different interpetations of the rule". Which is why I've noted the other applicable non-subjective naming convention, Use Hepburn. --tjstrf 00:06, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
Using Hepburn is only for naming when there isn't already an established romanization. For example, Rica Matsumoto is used as opposed to Rika Matsumoto as that's the way she romanizes her name. The Splendiferous Gegiford 00:11, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
Rather like how Oda romanizes Zoro's name as Zoro, eh? That's also an argument in "Zoro"'s defense. --tjstrf 00:14, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
Except that in this case, there's an official English name given by the English manga and anime. The Splendiferous Gegiford 01:42, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Reseting the line.

Alright, It does not MATTER what your opinion on fans dictating articles is Geg, Wikipedia's policy is crystal clear here: if the NATIVE OFFICIAL VERSION is more used then the ENGLISH OFFICIAL VERSION, then USE THE NATIVE OFFICIAL VERSION. Now you have NO ground to stand on anymore; You go by oppinion, AGAINST THE POLICY, we have IRON CLAD evadence, and are SUPPORTED BY THE POLICY. Normaly I whould apologise if my words offend you, but here, I don't CARE if it offends you. (どーーーーん!) (Justyn 05:02, 18 September 2006 (UTC))

That's your opinion as well. Just because you say the policy can't be seen in another way doesn't mean it can't. Fans have never dictated what evidence goes into Wikipedia, and I see no reason for them to start now. The Splendiferous Gegiford 13:34, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
That's not what I said at ALL, Geg, and this IS Wikipedia, guess what? The fans have ALWAYS dictated what goes into Wikpedia, what is removed from Wikipedia, and what STAYS in Wikipedia. (Justyn 15:06, 18 September 2006 (UTC))
Justyn, WP:CIV. Geg, stop ignoring everyone's arguments and applicable policies when they disagree with you. --tjstrf 16:36, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
Okay, can someone set a closing date for this discussion, we've done a lot of talking and results are overdue. I say give it a few more days at the most, otherwise a big decision will neve appear. Angel Emfrbl 21:11, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
These things usually stay open for about a week or so. The Splendiferous Gegiford 22:08, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
Well we started on the 13... So now its the 17... So a week is two more days. Then finally we can lay this to rest and move on to norm. Angel Emfrbl 22:39, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
Geg asked me to come in and comment on this. I'm not really a fan of One Piece, and I really don't have an opinion on the matter. But it might not be a good idea to use Wikipedia policy to defend either position when the policy is vague enough to support both positions. A better course of action would be to request a clarification of the policy from uninvolved admins, so that whatever happens, happens with support from the rules. Justyn, the fans do not dictate what goes in Wikipedia, otherwise RuneScape articles wouldn't be deleted as quickly as they are. Danny Lilithborne 18:14, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
Agreed. As I said earlier, the only example Wikipedia gives on common uses of names is how some English newspapers use the name "Torino" and other English newspapers use the name "Turin". Nothing is mentioned about factoring in how many people use which name. Conversely, nothing is mentioned about not factoring in how many people use which name. With that in mind, as Danny Lilithborne said, the Common Usage rule could support either side. The Splendiferous Gegiford 18:33, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
The "Official name" rule also can be applied both ways, since there are official versions of the english manga and anime that use Zoro. Similarly Oda, the most official source of all, used Zoro. We're running out of unequivocal rules here... --tjstrf 18:38, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
Unequivocal? What about the Yu-Gi-Oh GX or Gash Bell articles, which use the dub names? Danny Lilithborne 18:47, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
The fact that the author wrote it that way isn't a point here. Lots of articles use names that differ from the original version because they're the names used in the English version. And Yu-Gi-Oh! GX is a perfect example. When the dub names were first introduced, which names do you think were more popular among fans, the Japanese names or the dub names? The Japanese names of course, but the articles were moved to the dub names anyway because that's the way the only official English source - 4Kids - had them. That's the way things have worked for the longest time. The Splendiferous Gegiford 19:33, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Okay, about Hepburn romanization, I still don't see how that would help actually name the article. Sure, Hepburn romanization of Zoro/Zolo's name is "Zoro", but Hepburn romanization of Luffy's name is "Rufi", for example. Of course we don't use "Rufi" as the article name because his name is spelled in English as Luffy in both the Japanese and English version. With this, it's the same except that the Japanese and English version simply spell the name differently from each other. If Hepburn romanization isn't going to become a factor in naming Luffy's article, why bring up Hepburn romanization as a factor in naming this article? The Splendiferous Gegiford 22:10, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

It makes a solid, non-subjective line when you have a conflict over how to spell things. In this case, it's merely another naming policy that I can cite in defense of my position, but its ultimate appeal is that Hepburn is the correct, official, scholarly method of Japanese-English Romanization. (It's especially useful when you have issues where one scan group spelled a name X and another spelled it Y.) --tjstrf 22:36, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
This is different from just scanlation groups, though. I've never seen Hepburn romanization being brought up in a debate where both names are already officially spelled that way in their respective countries. The Splendiferous Gegiford 22:39, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

I have another bit of information to add in favor of "Zoro", precedent. As the Sailor Moon, Dragon Ball Z, and Inuyasha articles all use the Japanese names, and two out of three of their licences still exist and are still used, in addition to a very large number of the ONE PIECE related articles (Almost all of them) use the original names. I'll add this to evidence supporting "Zoro".

I removed DBZ from the list because the DBZ manga uses the original names (well, I know they use Kuririn). As for Sailor Moon, I think they had a specific reason to use original names, but I can't remember what it is. I think Danny Lilithborne might be able to explain that. As for Inuyasha, could you explain which names are different? I wasn't aware of any differences there. I removed the other One Piece articles from the list too, since the rest of the OP articles will pretty much be directly affected by the outcome of this discussion. The Splendiferous Gegiford 00:43, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

And on why the "Yu-gi-oh! GX" and "Zatch Bell" articles use the dubbed names is simple, they are better known by them. I did a search of the names of the main characters of each.

Yūgiō GX:
Jaden Yuki: 116,000 hits
Yuki Judai: 10,200 hits

Gash Bell: 456,000 hits
Zatch Bell: 1,140,000 hits

Although I much prefer "Gash" to "Zatch", and I don't care much for the Yūgiō franchise (I MUCH prefer Magic (I eagarly await the return of Slivers in Time Spiral)), the version that Wikipedia says to use is clear in BOTH of those matters. (Justyn 00:01, 19 September 2006 (UTC))

You missed the point; the GX names were changed right as the dub names were announced, so they were virtually unknown when the articles were moved. The Splendiferous Gegiford 00:34, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
And therein is a difference: no one objected to those moves, and they were reached WITH concensus, and this is OBVIOUSLY not a concensus. (Justyn 01:22, 19 September 2006 (UTC))
On concensus..es (concensi?), this was said by Brian0918 (an admin) back on the original One Piece discussion:
"No percentage of anything is consensus. Consensus is not a vote. The Wikipedia community and its members are always changing, so to pretend to be able to enforce something because certain members had a vote at some time in the past is ridiculous. The only thing that matters is your rationale. If you have better rationale, sourced by better, more reliable references, it doesn't matter how many people go against you."
And the rationale that was used for the move back when those names first came out (It's the official English name) is pretty much the same rationale I'm using for this debate.
But really, this has gone on for so long that I really don't care whether it gets moved or not. I'll keep supporting my view, but now I'm just curious to see how it ends. The Splendiferous Gegiford 01:31, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
lol, same here. I don't care a bit about this aside from any precedent it may or may not end up setting. I'm pretty sure the result is going to be no consensus though. Lovely to know that all we've done is argue ourselves into a useless "maintain status quo" decision. --tjstrf 03:00, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
Same rational, different problem. and as for references, we have BY FAR more of them, and all of them can be checked out at ANY point in time, making them VERY relyable, and I can't seem to find them, where ARE your references?. Also, your version is based on a liberal interpretation of the policy, and seemingly ignores parts of it that direcly partain to this issue in favor of more general ones that support you. And with all of our evidence, the exact wording of the policy, plus the meaning behind it favoring us, precident on the matter backing us, and the fact that you case is ENTIRELY based on oppinion, and a VERY liberal take on the policy, make our case VERY strong, and yours pretty flimsy. (Justyn 02:59, 19 September 2006 (UTC))
My references? Umm.. the English manga? That's all I really need. Note that the rule backing you up says the most commonly used name in English, which can and has been interpreted in many different ways. The Splendiferous Gegiford 04:14, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
Commonly in English can also be interpreted as the most common English word used by people who use English. Common English does not nessecarily mean the most common word in printed form in all official English publications and forms. People who use English are not nessecarily all the people who use English as their first language or live in a country that sells the English manga. The English manga is a good English source of debate for Zolo over Zoro, however there are more English sources, such as Google, pointing in favor of Zoro.CalicoD.Sparrow 05:05, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
The policy says "in English", not "in English official publications". This creates an interesting thought, because if it is just on publications, then the "official" version wins hands down, because they USE the "official" term. It MUST mean "What is most used by fans", because if it goes 100% by the official version, then there is no point in that clause's existance. In fact, I will bring this up there. (Justyn 05:09, 19 September 2006 (UTC))

I thank you Geg, thanks to you, the Anime and Manga Naming policy was reworded! It now reads:

Name your pages in English and place the native transliteration on the first line of the article unless the native form is more commonly recognized by readers than the English form.

I thank you so much for showing me that loophole you noticed! Under the new wording, it does not exist anymore. Therefor our evidence is what this case is decided by, not that "The english manga says:" argument. The new wording can't be twisted and misconstrued to fit your case anymore, now, your case is 100% oppinion. While ours, is a mix of iron-clad facts that are backed by the policy and precedent.

In closing, we could not have started the un-dubing of the One Piece articles once and for all with out you Geg! Ironic how your trying to move this page was your own downfall. If you never tried to move this page, this would have gone on until one side gave up, and the policy would still have that loophole. In trying to destroy us, you gave us our greatest weapon. Thank you. (Justyn 06:47, 19 September 2006 (UTC))

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Questions[edit]

Why does the sketch of Zoro as a member of Buggy's crew list him as "Zolo"? And shouldn't the fact that he's left handed he added in? He IS a swordsman and being left-handed is kind of special, right? 211.29.164.148 02:10, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

That was traslated into Italian, and by a fan I believe. Justyn

I've never been to Italy, but I can say 'thank you lady' in Italian if thats worth anything to anyone. Okay the origin of that sketch was I scanned it into a computer using a scanner from my English copy of Volume 3 + then I put it up on wikipedia. I'm guessing its listed as 'Zolo' because it came from the ENGLISH adaption of the manga. And whe I mean english I really mean it since this is the verison on sale in the UK. lol. Its the same verison as Viz, but the name change is already set to Zolo because it only started producing it earlier this year. I put it here just to back up what was said about Zoro being a bodyguard in an early verison of Buggy's crew. Angel Emfrbl 07:14, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
It was probably due to Viz's name change. Even though they didn't start using the name Zolo until chapter 50, Viz often goes back and changes things in its publications. So that page with Zolo on it is probably from a later version of Volume 3. The Splendiferous Gegiford 16:05, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
Thats what I said... T_T Angel Emfrbl 18:15, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
I was just explaining more how Viz worked. The Splendiferous Gegiford 18:39, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
Then I retract my misunderstanding there. Angel Emfrbl 18:47, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Considering he uses both hands to fight with, no his left handedness really isn't that notable. Or at least it shouldn't be listed in the "trivia" section because trivia sections are ugly. --tjstrf 02:51, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Folks, what is said in the Wikiproject, from what I know, cannot be considered "policy" - Just a guideline!

The true policy is at: Wikipedia:Manual of Style for Japan-related articles WhisperToMe 01:41, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Regarding Roronoa Zoro and other articles[edit]

Maybe Roronoa Zoro can stay where it is, but so shall Merry Go, etc.

Folks, WP:NOT#Wikipedia_is_not_a_Democracy WhisperToMe 01:44, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

You mean the Going Merry, right? WP:NOT a democracy, and we didn't "win" because of superior numbers but because we were able to demonstrate that some policies supported us. The position of WP:ANIME's policy on this is pretty clear: if the Japanese version is better known to English speakers, use it. Sorry to rain on your crusade. --tjstrf 01:51, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
Don't act uppity with me. Is WP:ANIME policy? I saw the discussion page. It seems like the editors have not reached consensus over what the policy means. WhisperToMe 02:11, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
Apologies for any unintentional arrogance. WP:ANIME is a local guideline. However, as you stated above, WP:MOS-JP is policy. Let's see what it has to say:
"An English loan word or place name with a Japanese origin should be used in its most commonly used English form in the body of an article, even if it is pronounced or spelled differently from the properly romanized Japanese:"
I posted some more arguments on your talk page. --tjstrf 02:30, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

I didn't close the discussion based on numbers, nor based on a blind application of any policy or guideline. It was based on the particular arguments offered in this particular case. "Consensus" means, to me, "no significant objections", and there are clearly significant objections to the move, based in policy, and more importantly, in common sense. No consensus means no move. I hope that clarifies things. I'm happy to discuss the matter further, if that would be helpful for anyone. I've watchlisted this page. -GTBacchus(talk) 19:29, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

LOL[edit]

I think there should be something about his bad sense of direction in the article. 69.169.92.216 20:28, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Pirate hunter[edit]

Seems like not many has noticed the slight reference to William Kidd, a pirate hunter of our world. He, too, lived law-abiding untill desperate and out of money (like Zoro becomes a lousy bounty hunter). I think a bit of real life information would make it less like an otaku article. That's just my idea. Yes, it's a fictional character. I just think the article only tells what has NOT inspired the creation of that masked swordsman. --82.215.244.97 07:19, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

We can'ty discuss that sort of thing here try a forum... Nor can we reference a 'possible' confirmation, just 'Confirmed' references given out by Oda. Angel Emfrbl 10:36, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Zoro's place....[edit]

I think under abilities it should also state that Zoro is the 2nd or 3rd strongest fighter of the crew. While he is amazingly strong he matches with Sanji and the two cannot seem to get a win at it. He always beats the people who are a little bit stronger than the ones Sanji beats and even then he seems to have a harder time with them than Sanji does. And I would also think that Sanji is still much faster. Seeing as how Sanji's main focus is on his legs and Zoro is on his swords and Arms. Zoro's probably fast but I don't think he's AS fast as Sanji. Just like how Sanji Probably isn't stronger than Zoro. I feel like I'm gonna get flamed because of all of the Zoro lovers here. *shudders*. ~~ FuzzyGoldGuy 14 December 2006~~

Actually I love Sanji, but all that is speculation. I'd use things like that in a fan-forum debate, not an encyclopedia article. --tjstrf talk 01:50, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

It's not a fact that Zoro is stronger or weaker than Sanji. It has not been stated. From what we've seen so far They always tied no matter what. Also Oda continuously avoids answering the question as read in his SBS's.

The only canonical evidence we have is their defeats of Kaku and Jyabura, who were ranked. The difference in their strength is intentionally very slight, but just like Kaku and Jyabura one is stronger by a few soldier's worth. --tjstrf talk 02:08, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Okay right back in the first few chapters Zoro was chosen to join because Luffy wanted him to be his 'champion' and Partner (First Mate). Luffy was thrilled when he heard he wanted to be the worlds' best swordsman. He saw it as 'King of the Pirates' + 'Worlds' best' on the same ship being great. But anyway, the important thing is reguardless the reference to Zoro being Champion there. Take what you want, he might not be the strongest, but he still is the person Luffy relies on at times.

My I suggest a lot of you reread the early chapters before posting stuff on it. I know their over 430 chapters ago and a lot has happened since then, but thats not the point. The point is everyone since those early chapters is fast forgetting what happened then. Yes Snaji may be stronger then Zoro, Oda may never get asked this question, nor may he want to try to answer it if her does. Answering it defeats the value of 'what if'. Angel Emfrbl 06:39, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

May I also point out, that there are forums for asking questions such as strength... If its not clear who is stronger, don't put it on the page. Go to a forum and ask about it. I know that sounds cold and it is somewhat intending to be. But there are times and places for these things and wikipedia is neither those. Angel Emfrbl 06:41, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Two paragraphs have nothing to do with his strength. It has something to do with the fact that Luffy picked him as his his partner. I can understand if you mean that it's Zoro's goal to be really strong but that doesn't really matter much to this. This part should be deleted soon enough since it's only a correction.

sorry to drag up the dead but i feel this comment is relevant if we want to put in a bounty/strenth section again. while he is often seen sparring with sanji on equal level he has proven to be superior more than once by leaving his swords aside and fighting bare handed against sanji's full power kicks. this is witnessed both in manga and in anime152.91.9.153 (talk) 02:38, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

Zoro's power is not second to Luffy's...[edit]

Zoro in the article was stated as second to Luffy in strenght, but he isn't... They are equal and it's shown in the manga... Check out the fight at Wiskey Peak... Their powers were perfectly balanced... And, also, Oda wrote the Encyclopedia RED on One Piece and revealed the values of strenght of the crew characters: Luffy and Zoro are stated as equal in strenght, they both have 6 as value, while Sanji has 5... So Luffy and Zoro are the strongest of the crew and Sanji has the second place... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 87.8.126.150 (talk) 10:06, 27 January 2007 (UTC).

I know this might be speculating and opinionated, but i think zoro is probebly stronger then luffy, not in pure strength but in terms of fighting. Zoro is as strong in terms of physical strength but it way more skilled and probebly faster. Also luffy's "Gum Gum" attacks leave him open and for a combatent like zoro i think he'd b able to defeat luffy. The other major factor (especially in one piece and in these two charecters) is determination, both these charecters has tons of it but that'll sway the course of the battle dramatically... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.30.240.207 (talk) 17:39, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

How about you stop there. Now Speculations are not allowed on wikipedia, a place only for facts. Reflect on this. Angel Emfrbl 17:01, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia is a place for facts, indeed... And if we consider facts we can't say that Luffy is stroger than Zoro or Zoro is stronger than Luffy, it's mere speculation... The only thing we have proofs for is that Luffy and Zoro are equal because every time they fought or are conpared they ended to be equal, so the only thing we can say is that they are even! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.48.163.248 (talk) 19:40, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

You can't even say that because most of the fighting is non-canon and the only real fight they had was interupted by Nami. Plus a fight doesn't prove the strength, as agilty, luck, wits may also come into play (or not, as in the wits part). The best we can do is mention Zoro is in the top three fighters of the crew (the others being Luffy and Sanji) and leave it as "Zoro is one of the top three fighters with incredible strength that makes him one of the SHs strongest members" or something like that. We can prove the top three fighters are those three, we can't prove the strengths. Unless Oda depicts the SHs doing a strength test at some point any claims can be taken only as speculation. Angel Emfrbl 23:35, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

I agree with what you said. When I talked about the confrontation between Luffy and Zoro I didn't only mean to talk about the Wiskey Peak fight, and I know that Memory Loss filler battle is not in the manga, but we also have the equal level of power stated by RED Encyclopedia and also the similar loss against Rob Lucci they both had at Water Seven... But as you said, it's only suggested that Luffy and Zoro may be equal but there are not absolute proofs expecially related to the recent chapters... So I agree with the definition "one of the top three fighters and maybe suggested to be on par with Luffy", It's a good way to put the matter... I think that we can say similar things for Luffy, Zoro and Sanji too... For Luffy: "He is one of the top three fighters of the SH and he is considered to be the strongest one with a power maybe matched only by Zoro" (because it's suggested to be), for Zoro: "He is one of the top three fighters and maybe is suggested to be on par with Luffy" and for Sanji: "He is one of the top three fighters probably second only to Luffy and Zoro". I would leave all as it is now, it's the best way to explain it because it's fact that they are the top three fighters while it's suggestion that Luffy and Zoro might be equal and Sanji second to them... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Goldsaint13 (talkcontribs) 19:15, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Well if someone wants to look up the ref for the top three fighters, it was mentioned by the spider monkey. Same with data book thingy. The SM specifically stated they wer ethe top three, so there you go. I'd prefer not to mention strengths at all, but thats me. I also am aware of the data books, so pretty much raw strength can agree... What was their lvl. 6? Something like that. 6 is 6 and both Zoro and Luffy were given it so, yeah I can agree they must be about equal there. Angel Emfrbl 01:02, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I've the Italian edition of the Data Book Encyclopedia RED and it gives the strenght values... It's 6 for Luffy and Zoro, 5 for Sanji... I like instead to discuss on the power levels, not only in One Piece, but in any manga... ^_^ As for Luffy and Zoro levels of power, I think we can consider them as equals, but Zoro is coditioned by his swords, he is on par with Luffy only if he has 3 swords of good quality and in good conditions, and they must be swords he is trained to handle... Luffy's power is always the same, Zoro's power depends also on the swords... If he couldn't use Santooryu (3 swords style) for some reasons he wouldn't be able to equal Luffy in battle... For example I heard that in the recent chapters he obtained the new sword Shuusui from Ryuuma, but because it's new to him he is not yet able to handle his full power and so he can't show his true skills... Or just go back to Capitain Kuro saga... Zoro with only one sword was able to barely stand against Kuro's minions Buchi and Shiam, but with all 3 swords and using Santooryu he easily defeated them and would have been able to fight Kuro himself (just like Luffy did)... As I said, Zoro is able to fight at the best of his skills only with 3 good swords, Luffy has a strenght equal to the best of Zoro's but it's regardless of everything... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Goldsaint13 (talkcontribs) 20:35, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Can I add that Luffy and Zoro are suggested to be equal? I think it's right to add it because since the Wiskey Peak battle they are always shown as the two strongest of the crew and probably equal... Or I can edit that Zoro and Luffy are the two top fighters of the crew taking out Sanji that is second to them... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Goldsaint13 (talkcontribs) 13:40, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

No you can't (well you can't but someone will add it again) as the manga itself says those three of the top fighters... Sanji is up there with them so you can't do that and as for Whiskey Peek, that was about 300 chapters ago... I think its now clearly out dated which means everything is now speculation. Speculations are not allowed on wikipedia. If we can't decide on this it can't go on the page. Simple as that. Angel Emfrbl 13:05, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Fine. I think you're right. So I may add about Zoro: "He used to be equal to Luffy in the early arcs but it's unknown if they are still even right now or not..." It's fact, not speculation. Do you think it could be ok?—Preceding unsigned comment added by Goldsaint13 (talkcontribs) 17:55, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Indeed and that text right there is just fine. ;) Angel Emfrbl 17:01, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Good! So I'm adding it. I hope it will be left and not changed over and over by people... :p—Preceding unsigned comment added by Goldsaint13 (talkcontribs) 18:22, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Thats fine. Leave the comment I put in on the comparisons as your statement is the limits of which you can take the argument. If anyone tries to add more then that we'll loose it again. I'll make sure it stays there. Angel Emfrbl 17:46, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

I undid the change without reading the talk page, so after I checked here I put it back, albeit worded differently. Ark 23:40, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

With what i saw in the fight of Straw hat crew vs Oz, i cannot be sure that the difference between luffy and Zoro is very big. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.11.180.161 (talk) 01:35, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Infact there is probably no difference between them as it was in the early arcs when they were even. We're not sure if they still are, but it's probably... Now Zoro is going to fight Kuma and it'll show something more about his power...—Preceding unsigned comment added by Goldsaint13 (talkcontribs) 11:55, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Oh my SCIENCE!![edit]

Zoro has confessed he is an aetheist. I'm just gonna shimmy that in if ya don't mind. Trunksamurai 19:26, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

And the big deal is... ? Angel Emfrbl 21:56, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
I removed the part about Zoro being an atheist in the "About Zoro" paragraph. It was mentioned (and seems more fitting) under "Personality and Relationships." No need to metion it twice. --Omega Destroyer 16:27, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Well, is that really necessary? I mean, what's the harm in mentioning it twice? I mean, the article IS about Zoro. And the first topic is titled "ABOUT Zoro". Well, I think the fact that he is an atheist (or however you spell it) is a MAJOR fact ABOUT him.Trunksamurai 18:43, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Major or not, it is unnecessary to mention it twice. The fact remains in the personality section, so people will still be able to read it.--Omega Destroyer 19:32, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
Well, I wouldn't say unnecessary. Believe it or not, people read the "About Zoro" article to learn "About Zoro". And just don't bother to read the other articles. So, shouldn't those people learn about his RELIGION too? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Trunksamurai (talkcontribs) 11:57, 10 February 2007 (UTC).
If you feel it would be better in the about Zoro section, then put it back there. But I would consider it a very minor fact, especially since religion plays a very minute role in One Piece.--Omega Destroyer 16:53, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

I never heard anything before about Zoro being atheist. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.194.7.41 (talk) 04:13, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

It's mentioned somewhere in the manga during one of his fights. Someone makes a comment about God and Zoro replies that he doesn't believe in a god. I think this was in Skypeia. Not sure though... Lunar Dreams (talk) 11:54, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

A little help here[edit]

All of Zoro's attacks are puns and have multiple meanings. Some common techniques are Oni Giri (Demon Slash, if read as one word it sounds like "onigiri" which means "riceball"), a three-sword attack where all swords are slashed at the same time to form an asterisk, and 36/72/108 Pondo Hou (36/72/108 Pound Cannon or 36/72/108 Phoenixes of Passion and Desire, with the amount of swords determining the power of the attack), a projectile attack where Zoro cuts air to hurt the opponent. See Santōryū for information on the sword technique, and the techniques of its sole practitioner.
The Pōndo Hō attacks are reference to the 36 passions of the Buddhism (Sight, Hearing, Speech, Smell, Touch, Thought and on to those desires, Good, Evil, Neutrality, and onto those desires, Purity, Corruption. Total number of combinations: 36). Zoro's newest power, Asura, actually takes its name from a Hindu cast of demons that were enemies to the gods, which was itself related to the word Ahura.

I've removed this text because I'm going to relocate it... But first can someone do me a favour here and combine these two paragraphs. I've had a go myself but got stuck. Firstly, the higlighted sentances are confusing. They reference the same techinque however, we're saying they mean one thing one paragraph and another the next. So the whole lot needs desprutely rewritten with the lear stance on the meaning. Angel Emfrbl 21:56, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Most of Zoro's attacks are puns and some also have religious connections. One of Zoro's more common attacks, Oni Giri (Demon Slash), is a pun on the japanese word onigiri (rice ball). Another common attack, the 36/72/108 Pondo Hou, is a reference to the 36 passions of Buddhism. Zoro's newest power, Asura, also borrows from religion by taking its name from a caste of Hindu demons.
Does this work for you?--Omega Destroyer 20:38, 6 February 2007 (UTC)Omega_Destroyer
Ah! Thanks! Thats better then I came up with! :D Angel Emfrbl 06:57, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Unflattering?[edit]

The profile picture doesn't show Zoro quite well. His neck is way too long and I don't remember him being that buff. Could we get a better picture?

Well the show's been on since 1999 so he should be around 24/25 years of age if the manga ages are in fact the real ages.74.195.3.199 19:03, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

They don't age. Zoro is the same age every year until Oda says so. Angel Emfrbl 22:44, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Monsters[edit]

Why was the paragraph about his roots in the Monsters Story removed again? I believe this is useful information for this article. Chaosof99 17:41, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

I can understand our zombie general with same story and name and all getting that ref... But really, the reference is a vague one, based on a speculation that is unreferenced and not coming from a Oda source. Angel Emfrbl 19:09, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
I have to ask this now: Have you read Monsters? I think the story and the character portrayed in it would be enough of a reference by Oda and I don't believe that every reference must be spelled out to be believed. Unfortunately I couldn't find a good picture but this is the icon of Ryuma from the cover of Wanted! http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y118/chaosof99/avatars/Ryuma.jpg Chaosof99 20:40, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
Yes every ref must be spelt out to be believed on wikipedia, otherwise it underminds the point of being an encyclopedia. You don't do medical pages without referencing the virable researching pages... You don't make statements about actors unless it came from a viable soruce (newspaper, interview, manager statements... Etc). Whether you like it or not, this is how wikipedia opporates - this isn't a fan website.
I have read wanted and to be frank, every artist will occusionally redraw or reref at least one character at some point in another form. Look at Dragonball. Whether you like it or not, you can't just write something on a page without it being adressed elsewhere. Sometimes things are obvivous (yeah Jango = M. Jackson) and they can stand so long as you write them in the write words (i.e. without making it sound like speculation). But just saying this is like another character done by the creator... Well I've already said that. ¬_¬' Angel Emfrbl 07:35, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

never runs from a battle?[edit]

What about Captain Smoker's lieutenant? Perhaps I'm being pedantic, but he definitely ran from her. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.106.112.184 (talk) 03:30, 4 May 2007 (UTC).

Abilities Section?[edit]

I think that there should be more information on Zoro's abilities. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Nicoler1 (talkcontribs) 02:15, 15 May 2007 (UTC).

We already have a ton of next to useless info there... And you want more? Angel Emfrbl 08:02, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

First Mate??[edit]

Where was it ever stated that Zoro is the First Mate??? Luffy calls him the crew's swordsman? I believe it was never stated that Zoro is the First Mate...or is a person automatically a First Mate if that person is the first to join the captain????

Can we not have this argument again... I think its on the SH crew talk page as well. Basically, I think this spurns from the 4Kids version or something. I can't remember where it comes from. But he is Luffy's champion/partner, that we can confirm. Besides, whenever you remove it, someone else puts it back. Angel Emfrbl 07:58, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

I was not planning on deleting it, I was just curious and since Wikipedia is an encyclopedia it should list correct information, that's all...

Well he was the second guy to join the crew. If Luffy's the captain for being the first guy, then logically Zoro's the first mate for being the second. Besides, he's (arguably) the only one in the crew equal in strength with Luffy.

Meitou[edit]

Kuina's sword is a Meitou, the 3rd generation demo slayer is a Meitou... Tashigi's sword is a meitou... Seriously, you don't need to write this next to any of sword. Meitou is just signalling the name is named/famed/legendary sword. Its what the Japanese used to signify its most important swords. In fact, Tashigi's dream is to reclaim all the OP world's meitou out of the hands of bad swordsman, that includes Kuina's sword off of Zoro.

So can we stop added this word to the name of Zoro's latest sword? Its not part of its name. Angel Emfrbl 23:37, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

His birthday is November 11 (11/11), because the name "Zoro" is similar to the Japanese word "zorome"[edit]

His birthday is November 11 (11/11), because the name "Zoro" is similar to the Japanese word "zorome", meaning a palindrome (a sequence that is the same backwards and forwards).

This should be taken out unless somebody can site an actual source where Oda says Zoro's name was derived from the word "Zorome", or that the date 11/11 was intentionally chosen because it was a palindrome. It shouldn’t be put back unless a source can be sited, so far there is no mention of the word Zorome in the SBSs, and if this is purely a fan-driven idea it should only be presented as such.

In fact in the SBS Volume 15 Oda is quoted as saying this about the lazy way of inventing the birthdays - -“Happy birthday!! Was that too lazy of me?! Everyone who thinks so, raise your hand. Whoa, that's about a million. But that's what they are. Don't give me any crap for it.” He makes no connection to the word palindrome or zorome. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.90.22.213 (talk) 15:40, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Its not connected to his name... But how he got to the birthday is. You looked up that word by any chance? You'll see why his birthday is 11/11. zorome is suppose to be (I guess its a Japanese name for it though) a number that is the same backwards as it forwards. I don't know how correct that is though... But its a joke related to Zoro, Zorome. In the Chopperman thingy, Zoro's villian form also had 11 and 11 written on it. 82.34.192.189 20:57, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

I gave a direct quote explaining what Oda thought of coming up with the birthday Nov. 11 and sited the source. He makes absolutely no mention of the word palindrome. Or the word being the inspiration for the name Zoro. As far as I know there is no reference to it in the books or anime either. Unless you can cite a source where Oda links the birthday or the name Zoro to the word palindrome, or where the connection might be referenced in the manga or anime, then it is being removed. Or should be presented purely as fan rumor and speculation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.90.22.213 (talk) 04:42, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Erm... Japanese don't use the same words as us. Ever thought of that? You used the wrong word there. They don't know english, much anyway. ^_- Angel Emfrbl 19:43, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Not sure what you are trying to debate here? Either you can cite an actual source where Oda says or infers that the date 11/11 was intentionally chosen because it was a palindrome, or that Zoro's name was derived from the Japanese word "Zorome", or you can’t. It’s pretty simple really. If it is purely a fan-driven idea, then I think it should only be presented as such. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.90.22.213 (talk) 23:13, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm not trying to debate, it can't be sourced because its common knowledge to the Japanese, its like knowing what the word "hi" means. Its the same with all the birthdays for all characters, if you resource it, you'll find out why one fans complained Oda was doing the dates the easy way. Like Sanji (san= 3 and... whatever Ji means). You can't supply the source for this, I'm just trying to point out this isn't fanism here. Its one of those things, you know but just can't put the evidence forward.
Look. Argue you all you like, I wouldn't stop you not taking it off anyway. As I said, I'm just trying to make you udnerstand where it comes from. Angel Emfrbl 15:23, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Yes the number process in which Japanese characters have number counterparts which allowed Oda to quickly (Or as he says lazily) get birth dates for names like Sanji (san=3 - Ji=2), Nami, etc…, are obvious. And a fan did call him out on it for being too easy to come up with in the SBS.

However a zorome has nothing to do with the process by which Japanese characters have number counterparts. That process has nothing to do with how the word zorome is being applied in the entry being contended above.

Okay, let me explain this... 11 is the same backwards forward, his birthday is the 11th day of the 11 month. 11/11... Get it? I'm explaining it thats all I can do. Simplest data you can do the reverse thing with. Thats what it has to do with it.
Look. If the entry is incorrectly pworded on the article, rewrite it and save a lot of arguments in the logn-run. While we've argued over the truth of zorome and everything, what could we have edited. I've tired of long unesscary wikipedia arguments as it is. Still. It could be worst this argument. This could be an argument about the origins of a character. I can't explain this any other way. There is no soruce for the knowledge, I've stated this, but this is common knowledge fluff...
In fact I did once remove that comment, along with the "Zorro" thing, but people keep readding these things to the pages when their completely unsoruced. I'd scrap the whole article and redo it if I could be bothered and didn't already know someone would turn into back into the state its in now. Plus I'm tired, I added a lot of references to thie OP pages half a year ago and people have slolwy been writing them out until there was hardly any left on a few of the pages. And I don't have time to readd stuff nor the pactice.
So can we either solve the issue on the article now or end this argument. Because while we're arguing over this, the problem hasn't solved itself! Angel Emfrbl 21:52, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Also why does Wikipedia lists the word Kaibun not Zorome as the Japanese word for palindrome?

Interesting, then if its incorrect its not suppose to be on this page. This is rather interesting as a lot of OP fans have claimed otherwise, unless their is more then one word for it, I can only think then that "zorome" they produce it something else or this is a rumour/mistranslation. Normally, to get birthday Oda has done something to do with the name. Sucj as, Sanji (3-whatever). This seems to be one of those things thats been claimed and disproven later (like the horo horo no mi claim where "horo" means "ghost" when you listen it sounds like its claerly trying to be "hollow" especially how the fruits power is displayed). I guess we can finally draw this argument to a close... For good (at last).
On a final remark, I am not angry at being proven wrong, I enjoy it as it means someone is doing some better research then I am. But... You didn't post that either because... ? Seriously, it would have saved a LOT of time ^_- . This is what annoys me with Wikipedia, people let an argument rage on. And please, remember to sign your posts. Angel Emfrbl 22:56, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
zorome
   (adj-no) (1) (at the) same level; peer; (n) (2) identical numbers; (n) (3) matching dice
kaibun
   (n) circular (document); palindrome
So technically they're both right, with zorome being closer to what Oda was probably trying to convey(11 is identical to 11, get it?) Yes, it's an online translation, but I used two separate pages to get the same results. Furthermore, any page that couldn't find a translation for zorome also failed to find one for kaibun, so they obviously aren't that reliable. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kimilio D. Ark (talkcontribs) 11:39, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
Edit to my above comment, I'm not arguing in favor of putting the reference on the page, because it's never been verified by Oda. I just wanted to make clear the correlation between zorome and zoro. Ark 11:54, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

If nothing else it's certainly a happy coincidence. 76.0.93.233 02:14, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Zoros asura.jpg[edit]

Nuvola apps important.svg

Image:Zoros asura.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 19:10, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Cleanup[edit]

Okay, let's start with the cleanup of this page. Any suggestions of where we should start? (Justyn (talk) 06:03, 24 December 2007 (UTC))

Reference everything... Anything that can't be referenced, removed. Also, take note anything waaaay too fanish has to come off. I think we could get away with the odd little thing. Angel Emfrbl (talk) 10:52, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
Also check pictures have their correct copyright stuff on them. Angel Emfrbl (talk) 10:53, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
I made a sandbox on my user page for this, removing pretty much all of the unreferenced material. I left in what I feel are the most important bits of information regarding Zoro. Stop by and take a look, tell me what you think and leave me constructive criticism. I'm willing to get behind this effort to improve the quality of OP articles as much as I possibly can. Ark (talk) 04:11, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Since nothing has been done here yet, I'm going to assume people are furiously researching this character to make the page more encyclopedic. If No one objects, I'm going to replace the article with the mock-up I made in my Sandbox, and we can start work from there. Ark (talk) 15:08, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

I have been ill the last week (sick at x-mas sucks!). Justyn won't like you (seen it). But, however, it will allow us to wipre clean the slate. I'll be around in the next week, I'm getting better. Just very tired + have a lot of headaches right now. Angel Emfrbl (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 22:21, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
Well, not so much "dislike of a person"; more around the lines of "objects to aformentioned proposed actions, but not the reasing behind them". You can get me to make me want to vomit in rage in you compulsively push a deletionist agenda against evidence and Wikipedia policy, however. (Justyn (talk) 12:41, 30 December 2007 (UTC))
Well, it's done. Something happened to the image, and I don't know how to fix it. Since I'm about to pass out from exhaustion, I'll deal with it later or leave it to someone else. Ark (talk) 03:17, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
Well its a start but you haven't left directions on where to take things... Could you fill us in on more details so the rest of us can help a little? Angel Emfrbl (talk) 19:36, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
Well I've tried fixing the image, but I don't know enough about using Wikipedia to get it right. I think the article is fine the way it is now, it covers Zoro's origin, his dream, and some basic character information. Maybe another paragraph about his role in the crew, leaving out anything too fanboy(girl)ish. The japanese article list some of his recurring attacks, and his major battles, but I don't think we need to go that far. I don't want to make too many huge changes without some support, so feel free to jump in at anytime. Ark (talk) 23:36, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
I fixed the infobox, and also the picture, I just opened up an older version and copy/pasted the older infobox over the previous one. I'm looking for sources right now, but scanlations on average are decent, at best, I can read enough Japanese to pick out a few sources from the original raw if I already know where to look; I'll keep looking for sources and adding them, I can definately use a little help in that department though. (Justyn (talk) 20:57, 2 January 2008 (UTC))
Whats done so far is a big improvment. I think the hardest part will be writing a page without giving the plot away. I'll watch the page isn't vandalised while you do it. My Japanese is very limited so I'm stuck with english translations. Whatever you do, don't list attacks, wikipedia decided a year ago we weren't worthy of those and they will have to be removed. OP attacks seem to be our most hated wikipedia input.  :( Angel Emfrbl (talk) 00:09, 3 January 2008 (UTC)


If you're looking for decent translations, you can't go wrong with Stephen's. http://www.mangascreener.com/stephen/onepiece/onepiece.html His are more or less the most accurate available. I won't be on much for the time being, but I'll pop in to make sure this article isn't vandalized and to contribute where I see that I can. Ark (talk) 02:22, 5 January 2008 (UTC)


Progress[edit]

I added a lot of ISBNs today, and some more references. I'll add references to his history later today, unless someone beats me to it. Unless there's anything else major that needs to be added, I say we call this finished and move on to another article, either as a group, or we split up the remaining articles and following the current Zoro example, we bring them in line. I'm currently working on a very rough draft of the Usopp article, because it's in desperate need of cleaning up. Ark (talk) 15:26, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Plot points[edit]

I've noticed twice now within about the span of 24 hours a "recent chapters" section has been added to the page. We're avoiding plot points because wikipedia is not a place for them. So lets not readd them a third time okay? Their never referenced anyhow so its pointless added them! Angel Emfrbl (talk) 06:51, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Are we going to make this a reputable WP page? I'm down to help if so. I think we should slowly improve this page, and revert TTN if he doesn't like our progress and redirects. Sound like a plan? - Peregrine Fisher (talk) 06:56, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
That's pretty much what we've been doing. Go take a look at the Usopp and Sanji pages, and Nico Robin while you're at it. They've all been significantly cleaned up, and I will continue to exert my fascist will against anyone who tries to crap them up again. Chopper Franky and Luffy get the treatment this week, since I have a few days off. Ark (talk) 20:43, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
I removed half the junk from Luffy's page... All his page needs now is the clean up. I've been too busy to do much else.
Other then that... Ace was redirected to WB pirates's page as a "test" to see how that worked. I'm not planning on doing any others, Ace is only done to give him a breather space until more info comes out on him. If he plays any more roles in the storyline, we can consider expanding on him again, for now he is one less job to do. Plus if we do expand on him again, we can consider really improving. Angel Emfrbl (talk) 22:04, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Just want to point out: plot points being on the pages are FINE; but the information needs to be sourced out, and it can't be the vast majority of the page. (Justyn (talk) 07:28, 22 January 2008 (UTC))

The bit thats fine, Justyn, is just a short explaination on their past history and overall (but not chapter by chapter nor arc by arc) explaination. Right now, no one is adding a decent set of writing to the page... And their all unsourced. Unsoruced info is as about as useful to the page as a single snow ball against the might of a large erupting volcano. Angel Emfrbl (talk) 08:26, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
Okay, the entire thing does not neccissarily need to be sourced right from the begining; we should start off by getting it how we like it, and then sourcing it out. Look, I even started another page in my userspace so that we can have head start there. (Justyn (talk) 09:03, 23 January 2008 (UTC))
True, but the basics need presourcing reguardless. And it will save time to source them right from the start rather then later on, when we're under pressure from some (TTN) to get the work done. Angel Emfrbl (talk) 17:46, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
Personally, I think that's too much. We don't really need ten-plus paragraphs of plot summary, just the basics regarding his origin. The 'Recent Chapters' section is absolutely BEGGING to be abused, it's just a simple way for unregistered IPs to clutter up the page with pointless info. If someone wants to know Zoro's entire history then we can redirect them to the One Piece wiki, basing the entire article on plot summarization just gives people like TTN more ammo to snipe at us with. If the length can be cut down a little then I can live with it, as long as Recent Chapters is omitted completely. Ark (talk) 17:56, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
In truth Zoro's plot point he will have include: his past... Joining Luffy and Mihawk. everything else can be found on a website or watching the show and just slutter the page up, as Ark stated. Recent chapters is just plain rubbish. Its never sourced and goes up to about 5 chapters something or chapter-by-chapter input; sometimes in more detail then other sections of the page which require more detail. Angel Emfrbl (talk) 17:59, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, things like this tend not to be sourced out of what looks to me to be sheer sloth; hence, why I am putting the history section in my user space for it to be worked on before we even think of adding it to the main page. (Justyn (talk) 23:34, 23 January 2008 (UTC))
Most other shows sum up their characters history in one or two paragraphs (one for past, one for present). Why bother going into great detail. Even Superman doesn't list every event he was involved with, only the major plots for each major arc at the most. (God I love using that article don't I? Lol, its just the easiest example I know of to show)Angel Emfrbl (talk) 23:40, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
Well, Superman has nearly 70 years of history, in which there are multiple continuaties (off the top of my head: the comics, DC animated, Red Son ), some even have a few retcons. Superman has a massive amount of history that would likely take up multiple pages to list in its entirety.
Zoro, on the other hand, has a little over ten years of history, with a single continuaty with some anime add-ons. We can write up Zoro's history. And look what I summed up the entire two years of the Skypeia arc: one sentance. A sentance that doesn't even really need to be there. I'm not saying that the history needs to be in there, but it's not that it makes the page intrinsically worse by its presance alone. I set it up in a userspace page so that we can get the history in an acceptable form. If we can get it to a good point, we put it in. If we can't get it up to reasonable standards? Well, let just say that it's easy enough for me to ask an admin to delete a userspace page. (Justyn (talk) 01:50, 24 January 2008 (UTC))

umm... just a question, y did you guys removed most of zoro's plot? i know that this is supposed to be an encyclopedia, but other character articles have plot summaries, even if they were shortened to just a few paragraphs.--Sanji_1990 (talk) 22:08, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Read the discussion page please... Its above you. Angel Emfrbl (talk) 22:53, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Fact or Fiction[edit]

Rather then posting all the stuff that is confirmed fake or not... I'll just list it here:

- After several discussions between fans, who stated that Zoro is equal in fighting strength with Luffy or even stronger, Oda finally gave his statement to the fans and said that he created Gear 2 and Gear 3 for Luffy to make him clearly the strongest amongst the Strawhat Pirates and to make his fighting style content more interesting. When Luffy don`t activate one of the Gears he and Zoro are almost equal.

As far as I'm aware, as of logging in right now, Oda has never said this... This is purely fan spectulation. If it IS true, the information has come out since yesturday - that was the date I last checked the fandom for any information that has been supplied to the fandom. Feel free anyone to correct me on that note. If not, this is a case of someone trying to put off fiction as fact, which is very against the rules of wikipedia. ^_- Angel Emfrbl (talk) 22:47, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Ok so im posting this right now about recent chapters and these terrible pages. Without them, we don't know whats happening to the character in the story, like i couldnt even tell what happened to zolo from this article and hes almost dead! So all the gits who think that recent chapters should be taken out should probably rethink that. Wikipedia is an online ENCYCLOPEDIA, which documents and records information. Therefore, the point is to record everything about the person and what is happening to them. I think that all the characters in OP who have their own page should be updated alot, like powers and recent events and stuff like that, because without them these articles give no useful information to the reader.

Ibpn2 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.4.173.104 (talk) 21:22, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

You're right, this is an encyclopedia. I think what you're looking for is a fan site. If you'd like to know what's happened in recent chapters, I suggest you go read the manga instead of crying about it on Wiki. You call these pages terrible, but they're a vast improvement over the garbage that was here before. Ark (talk) 23:09, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
We're not here to reveal plots... Thats why they removed the spoiler warning tags a while back, because wikipedia shouldn't have spoilers on it. You can get away with it on the wikia, so if you really insist on writing out every little detail, look it up, it should be in the external links section anyway. Angel Emfrbl (talk) 23:30, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
I'm not saying we should include a bunch of recent information, but spoilers are allowed and in a lot of cases are appropriate on WP. We don't include recent info to keep people up to date, but if important things happen recently, then that's definitely stuff we include. We should include whatever info is important, it doesn't matter when it happened, or if it reveals some plot twist from the distant past or recently. I think the spoiler tag was removed because an encyclopedia gives you the important info, and people should know that may or may not spoil something they haven't watched or read yet. If some newspaper comments on the resolution of a recent storyline, for example, that's definitely something we would want to include. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) 07:04, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
I agree, if something would strengthen the article while spoiling the story for someone, that's a sacrifice I'm more than willing to make. Anyone reading these articles should be aware of the possible consequences anyway. Ark (talk) 13:15, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
Funny thing is, I've never seen a complaint of the spoiler within wikipedias walls - on the page itself. The complaints I' ve seen are from things being said on the talk page. The most likely place you'd see spoilers, because we're discussing anything to do with the page. ^_- Angel Emfrbl (talk) 21:42, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

About Luffy to be superior to Zoro with Gears... Never stated anyware... Zoro has his Asura and the new sword that make him able to equal Gears power... As for official statements, Oda never stated what reported, but instead the One Piece Encyclopedia Yellow states something different: it states that Zoro has the same fighting power as Luffy but he follows him anyway because he absolutely trust him. goldsaint13 (talk) 08:18, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Shouldn't the names of his swords be noted somewhere?[edit]

I had to dig way back into the history when the article was actually informal just to find this simple tidbit of info. A quick sentence or two somewhere would solve this. - 4.156.54.179 (talk) 00:26, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

If we put a list here, its "fancruft" (hate that word). No go... But I suppose a sentance of his CURRENT swords wouldn't hurt.  :( Angel Emfrbl (talk) 20:46, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
Wow, try as I might I couldn't eloquently fit the information about his swords into the article. I'm glad someone managed to get it right. Good work. Ark (talk) 12:42, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Reception[edit]

shouldnt there be reception in zoro's article like there is in luffy's?--Sanji_1990 (talk) 17:24, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

If you have the information, go ahead and create it. -- Goodraise (talk) 18:51, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
Unfortunately i don't have the info, but if they have info for luffy, couldn't people check the same place for zoro?--Sanji_1990 (talk) 15:12, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
Three of the four sentences in Luffy's Reception section are referenced. The fourth source is somewhere in one of the Japanese manga volumes. Two of them are even linked. So you have all the places. You are the "people". If you don't do it, nobody will. -- Goodraise (talk) 15:23, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
Or instead of being lazy and deleting everything you yourself could do it, Goodraise. Gune (talk) 17:51, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
Oh please Gune, you know how hard I work for every word I successfully delete. You're the one makeing it so troublesome after all. But by the way, you could at least learn how to ident your comments right. I am tired of doing it for you. That would make my life a lot easier. :) -- Goodraise (talk) 18:14, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
Look I don't know how to do all of that so the best I can do is make suggestions ok?--Sanji_1990 (talk) 12:45, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
That's perfectly fine. You can do or not do, whatever you please. As opposed to Gune, I am not telling anyone to do anything. And I certainly didn't mean to say, that your suggestions weren't welcome, because they are. I am merely pointing out, that it's not very likely, that much will happen based on them. So don't get your hopes up. :) -- Goodraise (talk) 12:55, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Thats your personal preference. There is no actual need to ident anything. Gune (talk) 20:35, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Trivia[edit]

Following facts have been removed from the article by more than one editor. And have repeatedly been put back by another:

  • According to Eiichiro Oda, Zoro resembles a shark.[1] Oda uses the color green to represent Zoro, and he smells of steel.[2]
  • Oda has also said that Zoro's favorite foods are white rice, sea monster meat, and "stuff that goes with ale".[3]

I say it's fancruft and should be removed. Other oppinions?

Concept/Attacks[edit]

I think it should be noted that all of Zoro's attacks have religious and a animal meaning to them. 36 Caliber Phoenix, has the obvious animal reference, and the 36 is making reference to the 36 Worldly/Earthly Desires. Oni Giri, Oni translates ogre or demon in Traditional Buddhist Mythology, and are Beasts in Mythology, so they are the Animal. And Yasha Karasu; Yaksha(Japanese way of pronoucing Yasha) is a benevolent Nature Spirit in Hindu/Buddist cultures; Karasu means Crow. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.246.246.129 (talk) 15:58, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

That might require verification from the author that it was intentional because he's done other jokes with some of his attacks at times. If it can be verified, that's what they are suppose to be named after, then yes, it is something that is noteworthy.Jinnai (talk) 19:46, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
    • ^ SBS questions: One Piece Manga - Vol.20 - Chapter 177, Fan question: What animals represent each of the 5 crew members, Luffy, Zoro, Sanji, Nami and Usopp? ((JP) ISBN 4-08-873158-1 )
    • ^ SBS questions: One Piece Manga - Vol.40 - Chapter 380, Fan question: What colors represent the crew. What do each of the Straw Hat Crew smell like ((JP) ISBN 4-08-874003-3 )
    • ^ SBS questions: One Piece Manga - Vol.45 Chapter 439, Fan Question: Luffy's favorite food is meat. What about everyone else on the crew? ((JP) ISBN 4-08-874314-1 Parameter error in {{isbn}}: Invalid ISBN. )