Talk:Trafalgar D. Water Law

Dr. Law
Why does this page say that he is a doctor? The manga has never stated this and it is beyond me why someone constantly changes it every time I edit it out.

80.126.84.138 16:46, 29 June 2008 (UTC)a concerned anon


 * No idea but his nickname is "Dark Doctor" so I guess thats where it comes from. One-Winged Hawk 18:06, 29 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Yeah, but doesn't this nickname come from the fact that he's pretty much cutting people up with his power? It's only a nickname, not his profession 80.126.84.138 00:00, 30 June 2008 (UTC)a concerned anon


 * There is no stated evidence that Law got this nickname because of the way he cuts people up. It maybe a possibility but unless someone states it, it's more likely he is called that way because he is a doctor. In fact, the nickname itself suggests more of him being a doctor than being a slicer of body parts. If the reason he got the nickname was because for he slices body parts up, why call him a Dark Doctor or Surgeon of Death (based on which translation one uses), wouldn't it be more politically correct to call him Slicer, Battousai, or something related to body slicing? True surgery means to slice people up in a sense, but it conveys more to the medical sense than to random chopping up.


 * If this doesn't explain things enough, take this in mind. Doctors have intensive knowledge on how a human body works and is structured. They would know best the human anatomy. Wouldn't it thus help a guy who can split people apart if they knew such knowledge. Anyone bloke with a sword can hack away at people, but it takes a doctor to know which parts of the body would be weak enough to easily cut away and leave an opponent struggling in pain.Mugiwara Franky 04:43, 30 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Alright, I can go with that explanation. 80.126.84.138 07:48, 30 June 2008 (UTC)a concerned anon


 * Still not convincing to me, though. Luffy was able to come up with Gear Second and Third on his own without having any kind of medical knowledge, so it's likely Law can figure that kind of thing out just through knowledge of his own Devil Fruit power. Also, his tendency to cut people up and reassemble them with his power is the only explanation for his nickname that can actually be proven so far; he has shown no signs of being a doctor thus far, so making claims that he is one here on wikipedia is misleading at best.


 * In general, I think that Trafalgar Law's character hasn't been explored nearly enough for us to all be assuming anything. Since we can't go switching back and forth between differing opinions on his occupation, we'll just need to stick with one. There are good reasons why both arguments can be true - however, until his character is further established I think we should just leave it as is. If the title of Doctor ends up only being associated with his manipulation of body parts, it's not like we won't change it - we'll obviously accept that you've been right and change it accordingly. However, it's best to go by his current given title until further notice, and going around changing it again and again isn't productive. He is a very interesting character and it does look like he'll be more built upon. :) Sephirona 04:25, 21 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Personally, I still think that leaving the 'Doctor' title is assuming; I am open to the possibility that Law is actually a doctor; I just think that randomly stating that he is a doctor when no solid information has been given to support that is working against this site's purpose of providing proven, credible information to fans. However, I have not registered on this site and have no intention to do so, so I'll just drop the subject now and leave it to those who have.


 * His title actually is "Dark Doctor" as translated - that isn't assumed. It's the closest to proven, credible information that we have. But it's good to see that there are many who care about the validity of the articles here. :) Sephirona 04:45, 21 July 2008 (UTC)


 * I know I said I'd leave this topic alone, but I just have to mention this. Based on what we've seen so far, I'd say that taking a title *that* literally isn't exactly the best thing to do when coming up with character info for One Piece characters. Look at Zoro: he is called 'The Pirate Hunter', yet he has never actively hunted pirates; he just brought down anyone who happened to have a bounty so he could eat. Zoro has even said himself that the title had nothing to do with him. In addition, even you yourself just said that Law's title is 'the closest to proven, credible information that we have', not that it actually is solid, credible information. On other pages, speculated info has been deleted due to a lack of solid evidence; I just can't see why those rules change so drastically for this. Sorry for dragging this subject on; I read Sephirona's post, my mind immediately came up with a response, and there was no way it was going to leave me alone until I posted it.

And like I said, until his character is further established, we can't conclude anything either and should just stick with one decision - the one that seems most credible. If he's called the Dark Doctor by Oda himself, we should stick by it till it is disproved. Speculation is not preferred, but as the arc is new there's no way we'll know everything. His title, at least, isn't speculated to be Dark Doctor - that's what it is. You yourself tried to add yet unproven information to the Mythbusters page, which was uncalled for. I don't speak for everyone on this site either; please don't use my words in an effort to discredit everyone. Thanks :) Sephirona 05:33, 21 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I admit I did that; I didn't notice this Discussion Panel by that point and was just operating under the assumption that some stubborn fan was dead-set on keeping 'his fantastic theory' from being deleted, and I figured I'd take a different approach and attempt to get the word across on a different page that Law's 'doctor' status was speculation and not a proven fact. I'm not defending that move in any way, though, and I admit it was a dumb one. Though it may seem otherwise, I'm not trying to discredit anyone, I'm just saying there's no reason to come to the conclusion that Law is a doctor this quickly; I kinda figured that it's possible to just leave all talk of whether Law is a doctor or not out of his page altogether, or at least state that it's merely possible that he's a doctor and is not actually given. Then again, when you jumped the gun and immediately assumed that the Mythbusters change was my doing, you were right; maybe this wild guess will be dead on as well. Well, there we go; all the evidence I can think of has been given and any further arguing from me will just be repeats of what I've already said. You all can rest easy, I'm outta here; I can promise you that any further edits to this site regarding Law won't be my doing.

I didn't immediately assume it was you who added the information to the Mythbusters page - I knew it was you, it was in the history with your IP address. That said, I'm not disagreeing with your points either. You do present valid arguments, and it is definitely possible that the Doctor title could simply be referring to his abilities. I only said we should keep the original until further notice. A bit of what seems like speculation is inevitable when it comes to such fresh developments, but it'll all be resolved later. Thanks for your input. :) Sephirona 06:41, 21 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Its one of those rare cases we can put it off as a theory - see Speculations for more. --One-Winged Hawk 17:39, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Ummm..i still dont see how he is a doctor....this site is supposed to state facts. Just because his name "Dark Doctor" it doesnt mean he is a doctor. When editing it says to leave the doctor on his occupations until further discussion, but i think it should be the other way around. Until it is absolutely proven that he is doctor, we should leave it out of his occupations. Oathkeeper of oblivion 22:50, 22 July 2008 (UTC)


 * This is where the lack of facts and common sense puts us all in a problem. Here's what I figure are the keys points of it. It's a repetition but considering some points might have been lost, might as well list them down.


 * Law's pirate epithet is Surgeon of Death. Common sense states that if a guy's being called a doctor, he is a doctor even if he doesn't show us their skills. However since Law has not yet shown any medical skills of any sort, there is an argument that he might not be a doctor because of him not showing any skills. This same argument however would have to apply to everyone else who is called being in a certain occupation but have yet shown such skills. One example is Laffitte who is called a navigator but has not been seen navigating.
 * Nicknames given by Marines and the general public sometimes tend to be wrong in some cases. Calling Zoro a Pirate Hunter for instance, is generally wrong after he joined Luffy and became a pirate himself. Nicknames however are given based on the most prominent if not most popular aspects of an individual. Zoro is thus called a Pirate Hunter even after he became a pirate himself because his exploits as a pirate hunter are his most prominent aspect to any opponent. So if Law is not a doctor, why call him a doctor if it's not an aspect of his.
 * Law has some sort Devil Fruit ability that looks like surgery. Maybe he got that nickname because of his ability. It could be but there is no known fact yet if this is true. In fact, the amount of evidence to support this theory is just as less if not lesser than Law being a doctor himself. If this is true however, why give him a nickname that suggests a doctor rather than a nickname that suggests a person who rips body parts and replaces them.


 * All in all the fact remains that we are at a dilemma for now. Saying Law is a doctor maybe untrue to some since he has not shown any doctoring skills and his nickname maybe just a nickname. Saying Law is not a doctor on the other hand, maybe untrue to others since he is called a doctor and he may have some medical skills that he isn't using now in the same way that Chopper doesn't use his medical skills while fighting an opponent. While both are opposing ideas that have no resolve until more is revealed, the initial notion revealed in the first chapter that Law appeared in that implies that he is a doctor however has more weight at the time. When Oda reveals whether Law is called a doctor by profession or by ability description, that is when things can be truly resolved as stated before.


 * While it isn't resolved yet, I however wish to point out that Law's pirate crew is called the "Heart Pirates". Unless this means that Law is promoter of love and peace, their name seems to have a medical canontation. Also, apart from Law and Jean Bart, the jumpsuits that Bepo and the other two crew members wear almost look medical. Just food for thought for the argument.Mugiwara Franky 13:01, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

I just wanted to point out, that if it hasn't been exactly proven we should take it off his occupations. Oathkeeper of oblivion 19:08, 23 July 2008 (UTC)


 * But considering all known facts point to him being a Doctor, it kinda should be until disproved.Mugiwara Franky 14:49, 1 September 2008 (UTC)


 * But we shouldn't put it there if we're not sure about it. Shouldn't we wait until there is clear, concrete evidence to support this? We're supposed to put facts, not "probably true theories". I'm not saying that there is no chance that he is a doctor; I'm saying that we should leave it out, at least until we can gather more information about him. Oathkeeper of oblivion 02:30, 24 December 2008 (UTC)


 * While taking it out because its a theory maybe justifiable, its kinda more speculative based to take it out. True, its speculative that Law is a doctor based on as little as a title but its more speculative to say he's not a doctor on nothing. There is very little currently supporting that he is a doctor, but there is less than zero supporting that he isn't. One scale of the argument has a few points while the other has none. In retrospect, the argument with the more points, even if they are little, should make sense against the argument which has lesser, which in this case is nothing and very speculative.


 * In any case as stated above, if it is revealed that Law is not a doctor then we just change it as simple as that and accept it. However, constantly changing the article back and forth because of the need of facts is too tiresome. It accomplishes nothing especially when the article's subject is currently not in focus.


 * Though this might be rude but from my opinion, this whole argument is like arguing whether Moria was a giant or not when he first appeared. Back then, his size was not established with regular sized people but with midgets. Since we did not know all the facts, we assumed he was a giant and that was that until the necessary facts were revealed. Arguing whether Moria was or wasn't a giant before the necessary facts were revealed would be pointless. The same thing applies to Law here. It's just as pointless at the moment to argue whether Law is or isn't a doctor now, as it was to argue about Moria being a giant before he was fully revealed.Mugiwara Franky 10:16, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

My thoughts are as follows; removing Law from Occupations (Doctor) would NOT be saying with 100 percent certainty that he isn't a doctor, but leaving him on says beyond a reasonable doubt that he IS. Until it is demonstrated where the title comes from it's not proven beyond a reasonable doubt either way, I know the people who are arguing to keep him on the occupation (Doctor) category think that it is but if it was this discussion probably wouldn't have gone on this long. 96.242.70.208 10:45, September 25, 2009 (UTC)


 * New Chapter just came out. Law states he's a Doctor. Argument over.DemonRin 18:56, March 17, 2010 (UTC)


 * Additionally, people have been saying that Law's Jolly Roger appears as a mark on Whitebeard's IV drips from Newgate's first appearances. The manga images are blurry, but show that it's possible. Does anyone know if the anime images are clearer? Besides that, though possibly coincidental, the pattern on the stockings worn by the nurses tending to Whitebeard matches the pattern on Trafalgar's hat. What would you say is the likelihood that Law, who has already professed to being a doctor, was Whitebeard's own physician? CorbeauKarasu 12:50, March 19, 2010 (UTC)
 * He is a doctor. Go read the manga and search how did luffy escaped from the war at marineford. Law clearly states, and shouts: I'M A DOCTOR!
 * He took care of luffy, jimbei and inazuma
 * He took care of luffy, jimbei and inazuma

That's almost probably not a 'nodachi'.
Ignoring the fact that what's almost clearly meant is 'odachi' (the term for a japanese-type greatsword), the fact is his weapon's a katana; if nothing else, you can see how fuggin' short the handle is in the picture there. Somewhere between this and the over-all wishy-washy description of Zoro's swords (also katana, damn it), i'm getting annoyed at all the nit-picking over how much not-katanas these swords are supposed to be.

Anyways, i'm going ahead and changing it 'cause i'm feeling justified after this little spiel. Odds are it'll be reverted just as quickly, but as a man, i can't just do nothing. KojiroZERO 01:25, 18 July 2008 (UTC)


 * A nodachi is a real type of Japanese sword, as well. That picture wasn't the only picture in which the sword shows up - in Chapter 505, on page 11 there's another picture of the sword in which the handle clearly looks much longer along with the rest of the sword. Oda's awesome, but he's not perfect; it's probably best not to only judge based on one specific panel.


 * Katana are traditionally held at the waist, but Law does not do this. Whether it is an Odachi or a Nodachi may be up to debate, but it seems most unlikely to be a katana, at least. In fact, in my opinion, labeling it as a Nodachi was correct, based, at least, on this reference page about


 * Odachi: http://japantrip.tripod.com/nodachi/odachi_gallery.html
 * and a site with clearer pictures of different Nodachi here:
 * http://www.hyoho.com/Nkage1.html.


 * Traditional Odachi handles, on average, seem much longer in ratio to the blade, though this is said to be varied. Especially on the bottom left of the Nodachi page, you can see that the Nodachi in question has a wrapped hilt, much like Law's. Many of the Odachi have no binding around the area. With that said, it's still wonderful that you cared enough to bring up this issue; however, I'm going to revert it back to Nodachi, based on the aesthetic references I've found. Thanks for the input :) Sephirona 03:41, 18 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Feh, fair enough. Although i'd still like to complain that how a sword is worn is the only real difference between a katana and a tachi, and as such it's place at rest is little more then a trifiling difference when deciding what a sword is, that's not exactly topical.


 * Still, i don't like the use of 'nodachi', either. The term is supposed to refer to swords used on the battlefield, including tachi; anything involving great swords should, itself, be referred to as 'odachi', since that's the term used for large blades. Rather than change it myself, though, i'll let you alter the page, assuming my arguement has persuaded you to do so. KojiroZERO 16:17, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Trivia
"Law is the first character to give another character the middle finger in One Piece"

Do we really need this? It seems irrelevent and pointless.203.94.188.15 00:33, 6 March 2009 (UTC)


 * I think so. Yes, it is a random factoid (but then, it is in the "Trivia" section). However, it's the truth, and in some light, it's relevant to the nature of Law's personality. Yoruichi&#39;s Paramour 16:13, November 23, 2010 (UTC)

The port incident is most likely refering to when Law offered 100 hearts to the navy.In my opinion it should be removed from the trivia.Vazelos3 (talk) 17:56, June 28, 2013 (UTC)

Prove it. 21:12, June 28, 2013 (UTC)

Just adding something I saw recently considering the info I saw how Law was considered possibly a Tiger I would  Snow leopard because of his hat plus if you look for this there a website with the animal figurines of the character and Laws a snow leopard. Rockfur5 (talk) 03:44, March 7, 2014 (UTC)

Law and Robin are not to different from each other

1. Both of their homes destroyed

2. Both are sole survivors

3. Both are demonized for what they are. (Robin as a Devil Child) (Law as a contagious child)

4. Both detest the World Govenment

5. Both used to work under a Shichibukai 24.44.154.135 20:04, October 30, 2014 (UTC) 24.44.154.135 20:05, October 30, 2014 (UTC)

Law's Pirate Flag
Anyone have any ideas on the meaning of Laws flag? Doflamingo (sp?) has a similar flag but with an 'X' mark through it. I've come to believe that the meaning of the smily face is "Great Age of Piracy" or the "Age of Dreams". In One Piece Dofamingos underling Bellamy constantly talked about the end of the Great Age of Piracy and of dreams in the Gaia Arc. He continued to preach about how no one dreams anymore and stuff like that. Since he was an underling of Doflamingo's crew and used the same flag Dofalimgo probably believes in the same thing. Now, Law has the exact opposite of Dofalmigo's flag so he supports the Great age of Piracy and the creation of dreams. Anyone have any other explanations because I've been thinking about this for a while and would like to see other views on the matter. ---Insomniacpie 22:32, 11 May 2009 (UTC)Insomniacpie

I don't think it's a X last I checked its a slash.Rockfur5 (talk) 03:49, March 7, 2014 (UTC)

Interesting Observation
I have been looking at how Law handles his sword, and judging by that it would appear that he is left-handed. And get this, the two generals in the Battle of Trafalgar, Napoleon Bonaparte and Horatio Nelson, were also both left-handed. I don't think the connection is a coincidence.--DancePowderer 01:57, December 21, 2009 (UTC)


 * Theres a type of crab with one big right claw and one little claw and the predators of this crab have learnt how to deal with this claw. Well every so often a crab is born with the big claw on the left and the predators DON'T know how to deal with left handed claws. So the rarer left handed claw has a bigger chance of survival.


 * Same scenario, nature prefers right handers but throws in the left handers to throw the right handers out of whack. Ever heard of the phrase "led with your left", it relates to fighting where the first punch is thrown. The first punch is normally just to diversion and the second hand is brought in for a hander hit. Well a left hand is slightly harder to block by a normal right handed person, ergo leading with the left hand opens up the defender's defense line for a huge hit from the stronger right hand. Again its the same scenario as the crabs.


 * Many fictional works will purposely have a fighter who is left handed, because of the same reason; left handers have an edge against the common right handed fighters. One-Winged Hawk 09:37, December 21, 2009 (UTC)


 * Napoleon Bonaparte himself was not present at Trafalgar because he was a ground-force general and not a naval officer. The french fleet was led by Vice Admiral Villeneuve (I don't know if he was a left-hander). As to Horatio Nelson, was he left-handed from birth? He lost his right hand in a battle, which means that he had only this hand. El Chupacabra 16:30, December 21, 2009 (UTC)

You're right about Nelson. I forgot he lost his right arm. I forgot about Villeneuve at the Trafalgar. You've done your homework, EC. Still, all historical significances aside, I'm pretty sure that Law is left-handed. If you look at how he handles his sword, that makes it look like he is a lefty. I'm a lefty myself and I remember doing a similar stance when I used to play swords as a kid. It's been noted in a couple other articles (Whitebeard and Zoro's, I think), so I thought it might be worth mentioning.--DancePowderer 17:22, December 21, 2009 (UTC)


 * He might be a left-hander, but it is also possible that he trained to fight with the left hand in order to have an advantage against right-handed fighters; I've read that some swordsmen in the real world did this. If he is a true left-hander he will not only fight with the left hand but also write with it, hold the knife when eating etc. Did he do anything else then fighting with his left? If yes he must be a lefty and if not, he have just trained this fighting style. However, in our world, around 10% of people are left-handed, and I think there a similar amount of left-handers in One Piece. El Chupacabra 14:56, December 22, 2009 (UTC)
 * Either that or he's amadextrious so he use both or switches often.Rockfur5 (talk) 03:54, March 7, 2014 (UTC)

So in the fight where Law cuts Vergo in two halfs, he uses his sword in his right hand. Does this mean that he is maybe stronger with the right hand or that he uses both hands equally or is it just a mistake in the anime? I have rewatched in a youtube video, so i am pretty sure that this is right and the video doesn´t looked mirrored for me. Edit: Sorry for messing it up, was my first try --- Aiken Pandora (talk) 17:07, March 23, 2014 (UTC)


 * when i review old episodes, i would also say he maybe uses his sword in the left hand just because he is right handed. So that he can do the gestures for his devilfruit with the right hand. What do you think? --Aiken Pandora (talk) 17:56, April 3, 2014 (UTC)

Page Locked?
Why has Law's page been locked from editing? Is it that whole "Is he or isn't he a doctor" thing that I see above? Well, that's no longer a problem with the new chapter (It's not a spoiler anymore, the Full chapter and even scanlations are out). But for those of you who haven't read it yet: SPOILER ALERT! SKIP THE NEXT SENTENCE IF YOU DON'T WANT TO BE SPOILED!
 * In the New Chapter, Law shows up and flat out says "I am a Doctor".

The page needs to be edited to add recent events and put this moronic "Doctor Law" fight to bed once and for all. DemonRin 18:48, March 17, 2010 (UTC)


 * The chapters out. When someone with the powers to unlock comes along, it will be undone. Until then, its okay to talk about spoilers on talk pages and its hardly a spoiler once the chapter is out. :-/ One-Winged Hawk 18:55, March 17, 2010 (UTC)


 * MF locked the page because people updated it despite our spoiler rule, so complain to these people if you cannot wait.
 * And for the hasty people, remember : No Mangastream Scanlation pictures on this wiki ! Kdom 19:33, March 17, 2010 (UTC)


 * I wasn't going to post any pictures at all, because I don't know how and I don't think its worth messing with, but I'm curious, why no Mangastream scans? DemonRin 00:50, March 18, 2010 (UTC)


 * Its the same as to why no one used Stephen's translations when he was writing them. You just didn't out of respect. Mangestream doesn't provide scanalations for anyone but themselves and on their site they even note this. This is why their work is stamped with their watermark so they know someone has used it. To use mangastreams images would be a bad thing for both sites if mangastream started kicking up a storm about it. Its kinda the same for that RAW scan provider, the Chinese group, who stamp their RAWS with their mark because they DON'T want them used for scanalations. One-Winged Hawk 00:54, March 18, 2010 (UTC)


 * Ah, thanks! I didn't care either way, was just curious as to why. DemonRin 01:22, March 18, 2010 (UTC)

For the lock on the page, I kinda did do it because of people updating it despite the actual chapter not being out. It's really a problem with what's happening now. Like with last week, when by my quote, "Shit hit the fan spoilers" came out. Stuff like that is the stuff people just want to note down right away regardless of spoiler rules.

For managstream images, well they do say on their site not take their stuff so yeah, respect their rules.Mugiwara Franky 02:36, March 18, 2010 (UTC)

Who would want images from a bad site that ruins a manga's art by putting a watermark on top of the pages? SeaTerror 18:41, March 19, 2010 (UTC)

His Epithet
With the current chapter revealing Law is a doctor we need to decide which one is the correct one. Is it Dark Doctor or Surgeon of Death? SeaTerror 18:42, March 19, 2010 (UTC)

He is called "Doctor Doctor" the most. Never heard that he was called "Surgeon of Death"

Joekido 19:43, March 19, 2010 (UTC)

Actually it all depends on the translation of the manga or anime your watching. I say this on the grounds that in the manga translation I've read he was called "The Surgeon of Death" but I have also heard him called "The Dark Doctor" 99.109.150.42 09:48, November 25, 2011 (UTC)Fallen Angel

So Law is UFO now? :P I've never heard that epithet before. SeaTerror 22:50, March 19, 2010 (UTC)

Translating it from Japanese, 'Surgeon of Death' ('外科医' = 'Surgeon', '死' = 'Death') seems to be the more appropriate title, since it doesn't say anything about 'Dark' in the Japanese as far as I can tell.140.117.21.92 06:39, June 6, 2012 (UTC)

Hair Color
Keeping the inconsistencies between the anime and manga in mind, I noted that Trafalgar Law's first colored appearance as depicted by Oda had him sporting dark blue hair, rather than the black hair from the anime. It has yet to be seen how the animators will color his hair now that an official coloring has been released, and chances are Oda will be the one to change his version instead, but I just thought I'd put that out there. Sephirona 19:56, March 28, 2010 (UTC) Hi guys just thought to add on to this you can delete it if you want but on the cover of book 69 Law`s hair is black.Rockfur5 (talk) 03:32, March 7, 2014 (UTC)Now on book 70 it's dark blue again this feels like it could go on forever. 174.26.85.67 00:50, March 8, 2014 (UTC)

Shouldn't a characters personality make sense?
Would not It be wise for me to remove unnecessary edits? Such as add quotation marks to everything said? Thekindwellmeaningone 22:29, September 18, 2010 (UTC)

Relations with X. Drake
I deleted that small paragraph. Saying that they have a particular relation due to both of them coming from North Blue is a nonsense, otherwise a lot of other people could have the same. Even if Law asked Drake how many people he killed, it's not enough to create a particular paragraph for their relation. --Meganoide 23:09, March 25, 2011 (UTC)

Captain and a Doctor
It says here that he is the only pirate in One Piece with two jobs; Captain and Doctor. Did we all forget "Red Leg" Chef Zeff? Ryuzakiforever 03:48, May 8, 2011 (UTC)

Read it again. It says he is one of the only pirate captains with two jobs. SeaTerror 03:50, May 8, 2011 (UTC)

My mistake. Ryuzakiforever 03:51, May 8, 2011 (UTC)

Law's DETH tatoo
Is it just me or does Law have an extra finger where the "A" should be? Maybe Oda didn't misspell the word DEATH but simply drew a finger in the wrong place? 05:32, May 14, 2011 (UTC)


 * :: Actually ill have to agree with you that it kinda look like there is an finger between E and T but, but look at this its pretty clear that he has the D on his index finger. Further more in the picture you posted the finger with the D doesnt look anything like a thumb, and it clearly has three phalanges just like any other finger.

However Laws tattoo is highly unstable and in chapter 504 whenever his left hand is seen (page 1215 and twice on page 19) his tattoo is entirely missing.

And the buttom picture of this page really seems strange to me, as not only does it looks like it is his right hand, but the letters A, E, and D seems to be on his ring finger, middle finger and index finger respectivly. This is however if you ask me most likely some sort of error Cosmikaze 09:20, August 3, 2011 (UTC)

In the latest chapters, his tattoo is reversed. Where it was spelled DETH or DEAT H before starting on his index finger or thumb, it now goes the opposite direction, i.e the D is on his pinky and the H is on his thumb. That's noteworthy everyone. 213.65.173.166 11:58, March 15, 2012 (UTC)

I have already added to the article that his right hand now is tatooed under aperences. Cosmikaze 12:27, March 15, 2012 (UTC)

Law as a Shichibukai
I'm very surprised that Law became a Shichibukai after the 2-year timeskip. And he became a Shichibukai after sending the hearts of 100 pirates to the World Government. He's the first Supernova to ever obtain this title. I wonder who will be the other 2 pirates that have the Shichibukai title, although I may have a feeling that Buggy may be one of the other 2 pirates who have the Shichibukai title.

Ichigo kurosaki1979 20:12, March 12, 2012 (UTC)

This isn't really the place to discuss plot elements.. there are forums for these types of discussions.

M4ND0N 20:48, March 12, 2012 (UTC)

minor adding in the devil fruit part
Hi everyone,

i would like to propose a change in the devil fruit part ("The weakness of the technique seems to be the concentration required to maintain it. Law appears to be unable to move around while the technique is active without nullifying it"):

Fact is that after the time skip Law CAN move within his circle, without being forced to nullify it.

it says his bounty is the highest known loosing only to Ace, was Aces bounty revealed in Deep Blue?

First of all, please sign with a ( ~ ~ ~ ~ ), no space or parentheses.

Alright, you can change the weakness if you want.

Ace's bounty was revealed in One Piece Expo 10, you can go to Ace's talk page for the links. Jademing 22:28, April 2, 2012 (UTC)

Heart removal after effects
"It is notewothy to point that he was able to accomplish such feats after having his heart removed, which considerably dampened his power." was said in the abilities section but is there any proof of this I've missed. So far I have only noticed immediate after effects, no long term ones to vouch for.Kotoamatsukami (talk) 19:35, August 5, 2012 (UTC)

Sounds like speculation to me too.

Yeah, I'll remove it. Kotoamatsukami (talk) 07:10, August 6, 2012 (UTC)

Switch
I'm going to remove the switch to keep this consistent with other post-timeskip characters and with the formal vote on Forum:Pre/Post timeskip switch. I don't really know if it's better to move the post-timeskip image in the gallery or in the history, I'd say in the history. I said I move the post-timeskip image simply because the pretimeskip one has colors, but if you prefer we can also keep the new one in the infobox and move the old one in the gallery, like we did for other characters.

I'm wondering whether it would be good to reopen that forum, now that we're further into the timeskip and we've seen more characters. Some have changed more than others, and some have gone through big outfit changes that are more notable than appearance changes, so it might be best to see if people still think that's the policy we should follow (especially given that many of the people who voted in that forum poll aren't regular editors at the moment). I personally like having the switch for Law, and there are some other characters who I feel should have it as well but don't (e.g. Doflamingo). 05:14, October 7, 2012 (UTC)

You should talk about this on the forum itself. There was a discussion going on there a few days ago anyway.

Chapter 690
It should be mentioned that when he cut Vergo, his cut went trough the SAD tank and the entire building cutting it into two. Cosmikaze (talk) 10:53, November 28, 2012 (UTC)

K. 11:22, November 28, 2012 (UTC)

Post-TS infobox pic.
It's been brought to my attention that Law hasn't really physically changed after the skip, and because of our rules (decided in Forum:Pre/Post timeskip switch) he should have the switch template for him. So unless anyone wants to fight the removal of the switch, we need to decide which image to use in the infobox. I don't really know which one is better.

The pre-TS pic is full color, but Law is sitting down and it doesn't make for the best full-body shot. On the other hand, the post-TS picture is black and white (though the anime will catch up soon) and more full-body, but his body is kind of obscured by the long coat. 16:44, January 10, 2013 (UTC)

Leave the post-timeskip and move the pretimskip in the gallery (or just remove it). In a few episodes we will have the anime version anyway, so we have to bear the BW for about a month.

Yeah. Nobody has really objected to the "remove the pre skip" thing, so just get rid of it. 21:53, January 10, 2013 (UTC)

Tattooes
Is Law wearing a shirt? Cause it doesn't look like he is, and that means he has a giant tattoo on his chest... It looks like a tatoo to me...The pic of his outfit in the Dressrosa Arc is one example of it, then pgs 10 and 11 on ch. 710 on Manga Panda. Just asking ^^

Anon67.164.92.90 14:53, June 5, 2013 (UTC)

Yeah it's a tattoo indeed. 15:04, June 5, 2013 (UTC)

Well, don't know if it's a tattoo or just paint/markings. Regardless, it's definitely drawn on his bare chest. 16:07, June 5, 2013 (UTC)

It's a tattoo, no need to overthink it. 20:36, June 5, 2013 (UTC)

Should it be on his appearance part? Or does it not count? Anon67.164.92.90 22:06, June 5, 2013 (UTC)

It should be in his appearance section I think. 22:21, June 5, 2013 (UTC)

Nunca habéis pensado que Trafalgar se parece a la mano derecha de don Krieg, el pirata Gin?

95.61.130.106 16:22, June 23, 2013 (UTC)Lorebone95.61.130.106

You have to use english. 16:26, June 23, 2013 (UTC)

And no, he does not look like Gin. Similar skin tone, that's it. 23:48, June 23, 2013 (UTC)

Devil Fruit
I'm not sure about on other translations, but on the one I read, it said that Law's strength depletes every time he uses his devil fruit, so should that be a weakness of his fruit?

Also, is it notable that Law was the most likely person to drop that note on Chopper's head when they were stuck in the cage? 67.164.92.90 08:28, July 7, 2013 (UTC)anon

I don't think Law dropped the note because first his hands are at his side's and second if he used his powers Vergo ,Caesar ,and Monet would've saw his blue sphere and squeezed his heart.Rockfur5 (talk) 04:09, March 7, 2014 (UTC)

Speculation. WU out - 06:57, July 8, 2013 (UTC)

Top part is valid, bottom is speculation. 08:48, July 8, 2013 (UTC)

EDIT NEEDED*
FOR EDITOR: EDIT NEEDED

In the battle history section the final battle listed is -

"Trafalgar Law vs. Donquixote Doflamingo vs. Fujitora"

Confirmed by this week's most recent issue (722), Doflamingo and Fujitora were not actually fighting against one another but fighting together against Law. Hence the format needs to be corrected to -

Trafalgar Law vs. Donquixote Doflamingo & Fujitora

The history section of all three characters as well need to be corrected with this in mind. 130.253.34.10 21:20, September 25, 2013 (UTC)

Done. Next time, don't format your talk page post so weirdly. 21:26, September 25, 2013 (UTC)

Dead
He's dead, isn't he? I didn't add him in the category because I don't wanna see the whole Monet thing again. 12:19, November 20, 2013 (UTC)

No. Even if he was, this would be the "Ace-getting-punched-in-the-gut-by-magma-fist" chapter, not the "Ace-actually-really-died-and-he's-never-coming-back" chapter. Given how important Law is to the plot of this saga, there's no way Oda will leave any ambiguity as to his situation in the same way he did with Monet/Vergo. 12:27, November 20, 2013 (UTC)

The guy is a surgeon with DF ability to break body parts apart. Give him some credit! I bet this will be an "Enel pumping his heart back to life"  situation.

We add nothing until we get a confirmation that he is dead(which we won't^^) no need to rush. 13:37, November 20, 2013 (UTC)

Yes, he's totally dead. Because people totally die from Bullets in this series (flashbacks do not count). 15:39, November 20, 2013 (UTC)

We're playing the fucking waiting game, no ifs, ands, or buts. End of discussion. 17:17, November 20, 2013 (UTC)

^ ...and we are losing.

Page locked, victory secured. 18:05, November 20, 2013 (UTC)

I'm late and I saw the discussion ended; even so, I'd like to remark that, often and Oda-wise, empty eyes are unconciousness, whereas shut eyes are death and hatched eyes are half-consciousness. Alelucas (talk) 00:25, November 21, 2013 (UTC)

Bellamy decapitated, and here we are with him still alive. 00:37, November 21, 2013 (UTC)

Bellamy wasn't decapitated. SeaTerror (talk) 09:30, November 21, 2013 (UTC)

Wapol was though. 12:57, November 21, 2013 (UTC)

Retroactivity never got us anywhere. Wanna know what does, though? Waiting it out. 16:56, November 21, 2013 (UTC)

This really shouldn't be locked. Locking because of a few users is unfair to users who actually want to improve the information on the page. There also was barely any adding of the category, so locking as "precautionary measure" makes no sense at all. 17:06, November 21, 2013 (UTC)

is there anything on the page that really needs to be improved right now?-- 22:56, November 21, 2013 (UTC)

It should only be locked in cases of extreme vandalism and edit warring. Paranoia is not a reason. 22:59, November 21, 2013 (UTC)

You could also argue that the reason there was barely any adding of the category is because I locked it before too much could be done. And locking as a precautionary measure makes perfect sense, you just don't want it to. The difference between paranoia and rationality is the presence of probable cause, which we have plenty of. Just have some patience for Pete's sake, will ya? 05:28, November 22, 2013 (UTC)

Weird thing around Law's neck?
There is a feathery thing around Law's neck in one of the pictures of him with a blue shirt or something. What is that, and shouldn't we mention that?Asian711 (talk) 03:51, December 12, 2013 (UTC)

Weird Thing around Law's neck?
What is that feathery thing called, or is it not normal?Asian711 (talk) 01:54, December 28, 2013 (UTC)

I would say it's just a part of his top, you could maybe consider it a feathery ruff, trimming or collar. I don't know if there's a particular reason it hasn't been mentioned in the Appearance section, it seems that entire outfit has been skipped over inspite of or perhaps due to the fact it's pictured. If you wanted to add it I don't think anyone would object but I'm not a mod or anything. Bessonitsa (talk) 19:44, February 24, 2014 (UTC)

Bounty trivia
I removed the trivia about Law having the 4th highest bounty based on this guideline:"..by the time the 4th character of ANY group has appeared, they have lost anything "unique" related to them."

I don't think 4th place is trivia worthy. Going by that logic we should write that Luffy has the 5th and so on. Please give me a solid reason why it shound be there.

Law's Origin
It's kind of amazing that Law was affiliated with Doflamingo's crew back when he was young. I heard about it in the manga, but how did law joined his crew is what I want to know. He must've saw some great potential in him, and not to mention his Devil Fruit powers. No wonder Doflamingo showed courtesy to him before. I hope I'm right on some of the stuff I said. --DrearyMausoleum (talk) 17:02, March 3, 2014 (UTC)

(sigh) If Oda tells us in an SBS or in the main story, then we know. Everything else is speculation. And you said literally two things there - potential and DF. That's not a great amount.

17:04, March 3, 2014 (UTC)

Oh, I'd figured I didn't get that right, and yeah. --DrearyMausoleum (talk) 17:10, March 3, 2014 (UTC)

We're missing something to we don't know who Cora is and he appears to be very important in Law`s past.Rockfur5 (talk) 04:11, March 7, 2014 (UTC)

Law's Tatoo
Law's tatoo "DEATH" is not on both of his hands, just his left hand.

Upothe (talk) 16:02, March 7, 2014 (UTC)



Are you sure? 16:10, March 7, 2014 (UTC)

It's been on both hands since the timeskip. See Chapter 661 page 16. 18:24, March 8, 2014 (UTC)

Officer or Elite Officer of Donquixote Pirates
Law revealed that he used to be Doflamingo's underling along with Vergo, and later on his position in their crew was revealed, as he had a Heart seat which he had left vacat, and then the hierarchy of the crew was revealed. So does it mean that he was an elite officer, or maybe since Vergo was his senior he was a mere officer like Monet?--Shay.avigad.1 (talk) 15:22, May 21, 2014 (UTC)

Relationships with his former crew
All the members of the Donquixote Pirates regard him as an enemy due to his defection, don't they? So why not add it to his section of Relationships? Law has been shown to have relationships with Monet, Baby 5, Buffalo and some of the elite officers in addition to Vergo and Corazon.--Shay.avigad.1 (talk) 08:19, September 6, 2014 (UTC)

Law cured by Corazon
Please read the following paragraph:

After joining the crew, he became acquainted with Vergo.[5] At some point he formed the Heart Pirates and ate the Ope Ope no Mi, the latter act angering Doflamingo as he never intended for Law to eat it.[38] Although Law was meant to die at age 13 from Amber Lead Syndrome, he was somehow cured by Corazon and continued to live on.

It says Law was cured by Corazon but there is no footnote that references where this was mentioned. Has this been confirmed yet?

193.202.17.249 11:30, October 3, 2014 (UTC)

Law said that Corazon saved his life, though whatever Corazon saved Law from is unknown, so you're right. I'll remove it now. Thanks! 11:54, October 3, 2014 (UTC)

Napoleonic Name
Could his name be a reference to Battle of Trafalgar and Battle of Waterloo, both famous battles of Napoleonic wars? 188.123.231.21 13:47, October 8, 2014 (UTC)

Spelling error
His name is Tralfalgar D. Watel Law, not "water", unless Watel is Japanese for water, this is a spelling error. It pisses me off that I don't permission to change this. My source:http://www.goodmanga.net/one_piece/chapter/763/16MrHammer91 (talk) 17:47, October 8, 2014 (UTC)

MangaPanda gets things wrong literally every chapter, and should never be used to prove anything. ワーテルロー (Wāterurō) is Japanese for Waterloo, so splitting it into ワーテル・ロー gives you Water Law. 17:56, October 8, 2014 (UTC)

My Bad, thanks for the tipMrHammer91 (talk) 18:32, October 8, 2014 (UTC)

Law's Name
Law chooses to go by Trafalgar Law and not Trafalgar D. Watel Law like Ace chose to go by Portgas D.Ace insted of Gol D. Ace. So unless we change Ace's page to match his actual name,  we should change back Laws name and mention he was secretly born under the middle name D.Watel. Kris.gilson.12 (talk) 18:40, October 8, 2014 (UTC)

The Will of D is too important of a character trait to leave out. Why don't we just call him Trafalgar D. Law? The full name is unnecessarily long. --Mandon (talk) 01:17, October 9, 2014 (UTC)

No, we should use the FULL name, which includes Law's middle name. Don't remove "Water" from the name. 01:25, October 9, 2014 (UTC)

Law doesn't call himself that. He basically changed his name. The D. is fine otherwise we would have to move it back to the original name. SeaTerror (talk) 01:27, October 9, 2014 (UTC)

"changed his name" What the.... I don't even get it. He said that the "D." in his name is supposed to be a secret, hence why he didn't reveal his full name. There is a difference between keeping part of your name a secret and changing it. 01:32, October 9, 2014 (UTC)

Franky did the same thing. There's really no difference. SeaTerror (talk) 02:13, October 9, 2014 (UTC)

"One Piece Manga and Anime — Vol. 38 Chapter 358 (p. 8) and Episode 250, Franky is requested by Iceburg to replace his name from Cutty Flam to Franky."

Franky changed his name, Law only kept parts of his name hidden. That's a difference, enough to keep Law's article name as Trafalgar D. Water Law. 02:17, October 9, 2014 (UTC)

But is it really necessary to put his middle name in the title of the article? We can just as easily convey it in the summary. It just seems excessively and unnecessary. --Mandon (talk) 02:58, October 9, 2014 (UTC)

Jade's right. Law did not undergo a name change, so his full name should be used. Our main concern right now should be finding a bot or someone to go around changing all the links to his name. 03:02, October 9, 2014 (UTC)

I just think for the article's sake, "Trafalgar D. Law" would be a lot shorter and cleaner, and then we could put his middle name in the summary and infobox But that's just me. If you look at other wikia sites like say.. Breaking Bad as an example, they don't call Walter White's article "Walter Hartwell White". Standards are different between wikia sites, I know, but this is the first time a character's had a middle name in One Piece as far as my recollection goes, so I'm guessing it's in the air with how we approach it. --Mandon (talk) 03:06, October 9, 2014 (UTC)

Jade isn't right. It's the same exact situation. SeaTerror (talk) 03:28, October 9, 2014 (UTC)

It's not though. There's a huge parallel between changing your name and simply not referring to yourself by your full name. --Mandon (talk) 03:31, October 9, 2014 (UTC)

I can see where Jade is coming from, obviously its important to use a character's full name, but Mandon's idea isn't bad about simply adding only the "D". AsuraDrago 03:38, October 9, 2014 (UTC)

Hey but isn't the fact that Law has the will of D a major spoiler in itself? Plus it's a pretty recent spoiler for an old character, so shouldn't it be mentioned only in the article and not in the title? Also, I think that the other wiki articles that have mentioned Law pre-timeskip or even before this week's chapter shouldn't have the name change reflected also because it's a new thing. Dan2579 (talk) 09:00, October 9, 2014 (UTC)

It says on the main page that there are major spoilers here. We don't delay including information for that reason. 13:47, October 9, 2014 (UTC)

I agree with Mandon, there's no need to have the middle name in the title. Especially considering the fact that he just goes by "Trafalgar Law" and that's what he's called everywhere. 15:07, October 9, 2014 (UTC)

How many people call Garp "Monkey D. Garp"? How many people call Dragon "Monkey D. Dragon"? How many people called (Gold) Roger "Gol D. Roger"? Bentham and Galdino have never been called by their real names either. What people call him is irrelevant. Trafalgar D. Water Law is his real name, so that's what the title of the article should be. He can still be referred to as Law or Trafalgar Law in other articles as appropriate. 16:28, October 9, 2014 (UTC)

Exactly what Zodia said. We have redirects for Law, and we can still refer to him as Law or Trafalgar Law.... There's honestly no problem with having his full name as the name as the article. Too long? Geez, you'd think we're going to call Law by his full name every single time now? 17:06, October 9, 2014 (UTC)

Then we have to move Franky to Cutty Flam. Still the same situation. SeaTerror (talk) 17:43, October 9, 2014 (UTC)

It's already been explained to you. Changing and keeping secret are completely different things. Do you have anything else to say? 17:59, October 9, 2014 (UTC)

Actually they are the same. Iceburg told him to change his name to keep it secret. So it's the same exact situation. The D. is fine to keep but we shouldn't use the full name. You don't see the Trigun wiki using Valentinez Alkalinella Xifax Sicidabohertz Gombigobilla Blue Stradivari Talentrent Pierre Andri Charton-Haymoss Ivanovici Baldeus George Doitzel Kaiser III for Vash in the article title. SeaTerror (talk) 18:21, October 9, 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, full names aren't really used in article titles on any wikis or wikipedia for that matter. The title should be "Trafalgar Law" or "Trafalgar D. Law" and then just begin the article with his full name like it's done currently. 18:42, October 9, 2014 (UTC)

^ Exactly. Also, is this poll worthy? Because debating this is getting us nowhere. --Mandon (talk) 19:24, October 9, 2014 (UTC)

I also think we should leave the full name, since it's his name. He didn't changed it, he didn't discharged it as well, he simply kept it for himself. Ace discharged his surname, Franky decided Cutty Flam was dead and he was now Franky. Isn't the fact that when asked for his name by Buffalo, he answered "Trafalgar D. Water Law" an enough proof to tell he think that it's his actual name?


 * "full names aren't really used in article titles on any wikis or wikipedia for that matter" - actually we always used full names here, and I don't think that's really the case for other wikis as well.

As per this forum, real/legal names are used instead of joke/code names. Other than that, as Zodiaque said, it is fine to use "Trafalgar Law" on the rest articles. MasterDeva (talk) 20:23, October 9, 2014 (UTC)

Trafalgar Law is his real name. It's just not his full name. And Levi, there's no precedent for this since no character has had a middle name before, apart from "D." which is just an initial and clearly not a normal middle name. From what I've seen all wikis, wikipedia and such just use the first name and last name. 20:36, October 9, 2014 (UTC)

The question is: what do we want to do? I don't see any reason to not use a full name, otherwise I can argue that we should change Monkey D. Dragon to Dragon, since he, like Law, never revealed his full name. Or what if someone say a character has too much long name and we should use a simpler name? (maybe we will have another case like Law in future) By not using full names, you open the way to subjective discussion about how we should name pages, and I don't like that. I also don't understand your point about Water being a middle name... first of all the D. as you said it's another middle name, but then it seems quite non consistent to me to say we keep the D. since "it's important" but not the other one. And if your ID, you have your full name, middle name(s) included, and that's what I think the page titles should be as well. Obviously, I won't call "Trafalgar D. Water Law" in the text or somewhere else, just using Law or Trafalgar Law is fine.

He never changed his name, he just left the "D" a secret, as he told Buffalo and Baby 5 that he wasn't supposed to tell anyone. 20:56, October 9, 2014 (UTC)

It isn't about the D. It's about the Water part, Yata. The compromise is to use Only the D. but not the Water part. SeaTerror (talk) 21:08, October 9, 2014 (UTC)

In case my above message was not clear, using the real/legal name as the article's title is our policy. In other words, Trafalgar D. Water Law will be used as the article's title regardless of any complains. Unless Oda's romanization proves to be different there is no point in continuing this discussion. MasterDeva (talk) 21:14, October 9, 2014 (UTC)

Then we have to move Franky to Cutty Flam by that forum's logic. SeaTerror (talk) 21:15, October 9, 2014 (UTC)

As I said, Deva, Trafalgar Law is his real name. Real name =/= full name. 21:35, October 9, 2014 (UTC)

"Real name =/= full name"? How's that? Law's name by his words is "Trafalgar D. Water Law". About the "Water" part, it's quite common to have both parents surnames, but that's not always the case, for example I have just a plain name and surname. In One Piece, he is the first character to have both, so what? If he said "Trafalgar D. Law is my name and my mom's surname was Water" then his name would've been "Trafalgar D. Law" but that didn't happened.

Spoilers are one thing. But this is a character page title. Trafalgar Law is his real name and the name he goes by, so it suffices. This site has numerous warnings regarding spoilers and content, but going so far as to list his whole name in the page title does a great disservice to people who visit while being even slightly behind. It's their own fault for spoiling themselves IF they read into a page with spoilers in the content, but for these spoilers to be in the page title when they don't need to be, we might as well add (Deceased) to Ace's title page. Since, like Franky, Law does not go by his full legal name, using Trafalgar Law as the title is more than appropriate. When we have serviceable alternatives like this, a spoiler should never be the page's title. I mean, casual visitors trying to find information on the anime would be immediately spoiled despite taking necessary precautions.CorbeauKarasu (talk) 22:18, October 9, 2014 (UTC)

Oh come on, you can't bring the spoilers as argument! By that logic, EVERY new page is a spoiler by itself... and we are an encyclopedia, we provide all information we have. This remind me of the timeskip, when we argued if using the new images would have been "a spoiler". Also even if that's the case, this is valid for how long? A week? A month? A year? When it's not a spoiler anymore? The fact that Zoro joined the straw hats is a spoiler for someone he just started one piece. Spoilers are relative to the readers. That's why we place a disclaimer in home, we can't "defend the readers" from spoilers, the rest is up to them.

Spoiler rules are only in effect until the first English scanlation is released. Ace's introductory text states that he is dead, so does his infobox. Status has nothing to do with article titles and CorbeauKarasu's argument is invalid... MasterDeva (talk) 22:38, October 9, 2014 (UTC)

This is an encyclopedia, we put up all information up, regardless of spoilers or not, and we put up a warning on the front page about spoilers. It's your fault for spoiling yourself if you aren't caught up to the series and decide to come on here. We should ALWAYS put up the newest accurate information, spoilers or not, and people whining that they've been spoiled, well, it's their own fault for proceeding on to read the wiki, when we have a warning on the front page that this contains spoilers. Do anyone whine on the wiki about being spoiled that Ace was killed or that Sabo is actually alive? No. We don't cater to the whining people who are at fault for spoiling themselves. Why should this be any different?

Real names is... Guess what? Their full names, which is also known as their legal names. I know, what a shocker! ST, your logic would means my real name is Kathy, because I don't introduce myself as Katherine Wei Wei. Nope, my real name is Katherine Wei Wei, I just happen to keep parts of my name a secret. Much similar to my case, Law also keeps part of his name a secret. Let me bold this, because clearly you did not get it the multiple times we've told you: changing your name is NOT the same as keeping parts of your name a secret.

Lastly, the fact that this require a discussion boggles my mind. As Deva pointed out, we've decided to use the full name as articles' names. Law's article follow this rule perfectly, and the fact people are using ridiculously stupid reasons against this is honestly beyond me. "The full name is too long, we should shorten it", "The name is a massive spoiler, we should change it back to Trafalgar Law", "The full name is inconvenient to use, we should just use Trafalgar Law". Seriously? Come on people, I know you guys like to argue over ridiculously petty things, but changing the article name to Trafalgar Law is blatantly against the rules. 00:00, October 10, 2014 (UTC)

Law himself told Baby 5 and Buffalo that his real and full name is "Trafalgar D. Water Law". He added "Water" when he said they asked for his complete and true name, so it should be what we go with. After all, we (and the majority of the world prior to the Battle of Marineford) didn't know Dragon's full name until Garp said it, and since then, we went with it. 04:06, October 10, 2014 (UTC)

It doesn't have to be the full name for it to be "real". For example, someone could say "People call me Joe, but my real name is Jonathan". You're not telling someone a fake name when you introduce yourself with your first name and surname. The policy you keep referring to is about using real names, not full/legal names. And if anything, "Trafalgar Law" is more of a legal name than "Trafalgar D. Water Law", considering that's how his name must be written in all the government documents about his Shichibukai status etc. 12:14, October 10, 2014 (UTC)

As a certain Marine Admiral once said, "is the World Government some kind of God?" and in our case we could interpret that as all-knowing. It is highly probable they do not know Law's real name. Plus, if we follow your logic we should change Roger's name to Gold Roger. The World Government came to call him that after he became the Pirate King and the majority of the people know him by that name. By the way, what does "more of a legal name" means exactly? Are you playing with words here? As the saying goes "you can't be just a little bit pregnant" either you are or you aren't. Law himself revealed his name to us. Anything else is just semantics. MasterDeva (talk) 14:41, October 10, 2014 (UTC)

I think changing "Trafalgar Law" to "Trafalgar D. Water Law" is like changing "Franky" to "Cutty Flam". :-/--Capitán Noot (talk) 06:59, October 12, 2014 (UTC)

His real name is Trafalgar D. Water Law, so we use his real name, because it is his name, which he never changed, and even made sure to make emphasis on the fact that since it is not a code name he can't go and change it, is just that simple, people worrying about spoilers should knew where they are to start with, and people worrying about the name being too long should learn to read better, if you already know who the subject is then mentally skip the rest, plus it appears only in the relevant places, like the title of the page, introduction and character box, not the whole article. Doomroar (talk) 16:18, October 13, 2014 (UTC)

@Capitán Noot: that's actually Franky name, true, however there is a big difference between these two cases: Franky forsake his old name and identity. Law never did. He simply never told anyone about it (or at least he didn't make it public). Even Dragon never revealed publicly his full name since not even Ivankov knew it.

As odd as it is, should we just have a poll to settle this? Talking hasen't resolved this since many still want Trafalgar D. Law over his full name. AsuraDrago 17:00, October 13, 2014 (UTC)

At this point no. We really should just wait it out. Water is correct enough that it can stay, but anything beyond that, in application to Law's name as well as Lami's, is unclear as the word choiced used was intentionally vague. Let's wait to hear Corazon's warning spiel to Law about why he's in danger if he stays. Chances are it will shed some light on this. 21:30, October 13, 2014 (UTC)

Changing his name to Trafalgar D. Law wouldn't violate any rules, Dance, so there's no reason not to consider it. Plenty of us are in support of shortening it so not doing a poll is basically disregarding the opinions of everyone against keeping his middle name. We should poll it, if nothing else then to let the community decide what we should call him. I doubt we'll get anymore elaboration on his name in the manga anyways. His full name is Trafalgar D. Water Law, but that doesn't mean Trafalgar Law or Trafalgar D. Law are fake names. They're just shortened versions of his real name. --Mandon (talk) 20:50, October 16, 2014 (UTC)

Can we change the way the name is shown? Instead of: "Trafalgar D. Water Law, more commonly known as just Trafalgar Law", We should put it as: "Trafalgar Law, Full name Trafalgar D. Water Law to minimize spoilers for anime views googleing his name Coool121212 (talk) 02:39, October 21, 2014 (UTC)

We do not take spoilers into consideration for this type of thing. If the full name is available, we use it unless the character specifically asked to be called something else, such as Cutty Flam throwing his name away to become Franky or Ace choosing Portgas over Gol. With Law, we don't know if he discarded any part of his name or simply chose to hide it as a sort of lie of omission. So, until we know his choice, we're going to go with the whole thing. 02:54, October 21, 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, the wiki is spoiler heavy and we never claim otherwise. Read it at your own risk. I echo Yata's earlier comment that when Law was asked about his "real" name, he told Baby 5 and Buffalo it was Water Law. It was hidden, not changed. It's no different from Monkey D. Dragon before his name was made public, but nobody's after changing his article title, are they? Law's name is made of 4 words, it sounds weird, but just frickin' deal with it.

Can we close this discussion now? 04:21, October 21, 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, I think it's resolved. 08:22, October 21, 2014 (UTC)

If you insist on using full names for everything, then go ahead and rename the Shichibukai article to "Royal Shichibukai". 11:44, October 21, 2014 (UTC)

It is not Royal Shichibukai already? well that better get fixed. --Doomroar (talk) 12:06, October 21, 2014 (UTC)


 * "Shichibukai" is not the name of a person, it is irrelevant to this discussion. 12:44, October 21, 2014 (UTC)

There's no clear majority so there has to be a poll. SeaTerror (talk) 17:14, October 21, 2014 (UTC)

There isn't? I must be reading the wrong thread. It seemed over and done with until Awaikage decided to drop a non sequetir. 17:25, October 21, 2014 (UTC)

Because Kage is totally the only one against the name. SeaTerror (talk) 17:26, October 21, 2014 (UTC)

The discussion isn't resolved. The following people are against keeping the name as it is, although it differs between who wants to keep the D and who wants it to stay "Trafalgar Law" either way, these are the following people that want it changed.

1. Kris.gilson.12

2. Me

3. SeaTerror

4. Dan2579 [even though his spoiler reason isn't very valid, it doesn't really matter if we do a poll]

5. Awaikage

6. CorbeauKarasu

7. Coool121212

People who want it to stay the same.

1. Jade

2.JustsomeDude

3. Zodia

4. Levia

5. MasterDeva

6. Yata

7. Doomroar

8. Dance

Granted, there are people that commented on this discussion but weren't specific about which outcome they'd prefer, or came off as neutral on it... So this isn't an exact statistic. But given that there's only one more person that specifically advocated for keeping the title as it is, I wouldn't at all call that a "clear majority". There should be a poll. --Mandon (talk) 01:34, October 23, 2014 (UTC)

I understand that spoilers are rarely, if ever, taken into account and in just about any other case, I'd agree. The site is heavily marked against spoilers, but I don't think any of the previous spoilers are like this. You must realize that this page is the first that comes up when "Trafalgar Law" is typed into a search engine. With the name changed this drastically, even people who are being careful to avoid spoilers will have no way to avoid having this new information. Ace's page doesn't have "(Deceased)" written after his name on its title, even if that would be accurate and no other character has an unrevealed full name with this much significance. I still think this page should be the exception at least for the time being and remain "Trafalgar Law." CorbeauKarasu (talk) 06:12, October 24, 2014 (UTC)

So many people are using the spoiler argument despite it's invalidity so I'd just like to point out for the record that there are plenty of better reasons to not use his full name in the title of the article. My main issue is the fact that "Trafalgar D. Water Law" is much too long of a title and it would be much cleaner and more attractive if it was shortened to "Trafalgar D. Law" or simply "Trafalgar Law". It wouldn't contradict anything to do so. Notice how Johnny Depp's wikipedia page isn't called "Johnathan Christopher Depp". A shortened name is just as "real" as a full name, and as such, it really isn't necessary to include his middle name in the title. --Mandon (talk) 07:16, October 25, 2014 (UTC)

Okay, here's what it comes down to: We use the character's name as close to completion as possible unless the character says they got rid of it, which is why you don't see Franky Flam or Gol D. Ace. Same thing applies here. Until we here him say he just wants to be called Trafalgar Law, or Water D. Law, or pink rainbow gumdrops, it stays as is. Arguing it is useless, especially if you're going to try to cry spoilers. We leave it until we know more. 08:54, October 25, 2014 (UTC)

I'll join the people to say this article must stay Trafalgar Law.

12:03 October 25, 2014

There we go. It's an even 8 vs 8. Time for a poll. Also there's nothing in the guidelines relating to middle names, Dance, so I think you're jumping the gun quite a bit to completely dismiss the notion of changing it. Trafalgar Law is still his real name.. not an alias. It's just shortened, so it's completely viable as a title in the article. Not sure why everyone keeps bringing up Franky vs Cutty Flam because it's not even a remotely similar scenario. --Mandon (talk) 04:07, October 26, 2014 (UTC)

That is the biggest load I've ever heard. We use the most complete name available. That's why we use Monkey D. Luffy and Roronoa Zoro and not just Luffy and Zoro. We don't shorten them, so we won't shorten this. If you can't see the parallels between this and Cutty Flam, then that's your problem. We use the complete name unless the character states otherwise. 04:27, October 26, 2014 (UTC)

Franky is an name he used to replace his old one, Trafalgar Law is a shortened version of his full name, but it's still his real name. There are no parallels. We haven't had any characters with middle names in the series before so there's absolutely no precedent to suggest that we have to include one in the title. So I don't buy that argument. 50% of the people commenting on here want it changed, and since there's no precedent to how middle names are handled on this site, there needs to be a poll, otherwise you're completely undermining the opposing side's right to have a say in this. --Mandon (talk) 17:02, October 26, 2014 (UTC)

If there's going to be a poll the name of this page will be the full name because half of the supporters of the shortened form can't vote anyway. I support the full name btw. 17:20, October 26, 2014 (UTC)

I still don't see the problem with having his full name as the title. Why wouldn't we want to be as detailed as possible (again, crying spoilers is invalid here)? If everyone's confused because of whether or not Water is his real last name, then we should do what we always do: Give all the details we can and then fix the kinks once we learn what they are. There's no precedent to suggest we shouldn't use it, unless you have a problem with providing accurate information. Tell me, what's it hurting? 18:52, October 26, 2014 (UTC)

My issue lies soley with how long his full name is. It would be cleaner and more attractive in the article to shorten it to Trafalgar D. Law or simply Trafalgar Law. Additionally we can still put his full name in the infobox and summary. With that being said, I'll swing your question right back at you. What's the harm in shortening it in the title if the full name is displayed everywhere else? Do the pros of keeping his complete name in the title outweigh the cons? --Mandon (talk) 22:27, October 26, 2014 (UTC)

We have titles that are much longer than this one and no one's had a problem with them. The Legend of the Sacred Burning Beast of Barujimoa is one example. That's been around for years and no one's had a problem with it and that title takes up two lines, unlike Law here. Characterwise it's only about 2 or 3 longer than Donquixote Doflamingo. It's well within range of other article titles on here. Length should not be a huge factor here. By keeping it, we'd be doing our job of maintaining consistent and accurate information, which would not be the case if we removed it. Just because it's the first time someone used a middle name doesn't mean we have to treat it any differently. 23:32, October 26, 2014 (UTC)

That seems a little different, since it would be harder to shorten a specific name for an event. Also, compared to an article as prominent on the site as Law's, the one you linked only appears on a couple of pages, and there are more pressing issues to deal with on the site than worry about how long the title of an article that only contains two paragraphs of content is. There was never really much discussion on the title to begin with and the community never explicitly decided that titles as long as that were acceptable. Such a discussion never even took place, as far as I can tell. Anyways, back on point. I understand that the length of Law's full name isn't an incredibly major issue but in my opinion "Trafalgar D. Water Law" is still a mouth-full, as is "The Legend of the Sacred Burning Burning Beast of Barujimoa". The article doesn't look unattractive with his full name displayed as the title, but it would look a little neater by removing the "Water" part of his name from the title, in my opinion. So as I asked in my original question.. what exactly are the cons of shortening it if the article appears neater and we still display his middle name in very noticeable spots on the infobox and summary? We're still keeping the info consistent and accurate, since the first thing people would read in the summary is his full name. --Mandon (talk) 05:14, October 27, 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for verifying my point about no one having a problem with the The Legend of the Sacred Burning Beast of Barujimoa article. As for your question, it looks sloppy, inconsistent, and incomplete to remove a word from the title and not the page itself. We still keep it Trafalgar Law or Trafalgar D. Law in some other things around the wiki when/where appropriate in order to provide proper context and support for knowledge base from the time. I would understand and even agree with you if Water were anything but a part of his actual name. Yes, it's long, but it's also fully correct, as opposed to taking it out which would just feel like we're half-assing it out of laziness or something. So what if it's a long title to say? That won't repel people from the article or make it any less appealing. If anything, it'll draw more people who want to know why that's his name now and compel them to read more about it, which is the one of the main purposes of this wiki and wikis in general, to provide as much information in as much detail about the topic as possible. We'd be doing a disservice to both ourselves and readers at large to shorten the title just because it's a longer name than normal. Longer doesn't equal bad. Different, yes, but not bad or problematic. Dragon and Garp's articles didn't see a drop in traffic when they were moved from Dragon to Monkey D. Dragon and Garp to Monkey D. Garp and given longer names. No one thought, "Great, now I have to say more words to refer to them". In fact, they saw a rise in traffic as well as users. Being as complete as we can on articles, including their titles, no matter how long they may be, will only serve to better this place in the long run. Seeing his full name in the title would also better clarify for people yes, his name is indeed Trafalgar D. Water Law and no, the contrast between what you see in the info box and top line vs. the title is not vandalism, it's proper consistency. The title is the first thing people see when they look at the article from anywhere on the wiki, and a new title on an old page will only raise curiosity and interest. Moving it back would also be a step back. Some titles and names will be long, this is inevitable, and smart money says this article won't be the last of them. The best thing we can do is roll with the punches and take them exactly as they come. 06:25, October 27, 2014 (UTC)

Well said, DP. So well said in fact, that nobody responded to it. I think we can call this issue closed now. 23:45, November 12, 2014 (UTC)