File talk:Jinbe Anime Infobox.png

Glorious vs. Not-so much.
Oh boy another Nada image war. Perfect full body image vs. half a body. 00:13, January 22, 2013 (UTC)

Of all full body images to choose, you picked the one with missing features, way in the background, and having another character in the way? 00:16, January 22, 2013 (UTC)

Of all the images to revert to, you pick the one with the pixelation and non full body. 00:18, January 22, 2013 (UTC)

Because it's a better image to use. Your image barely shows more, it doesn't have the facial features, and it being in the background makes it low quality in itself. Just because the pixels look clearer doesn't mean it's high quality. 00:23, January 22, 2013 (UTC)

Regardless, pixelation isn't allowed in the infobox. It's better to settle for an image that's full body and non pixelated until a better one can be found. 00:28, January 22, 2013 (UTC)

That's not a rule. Even if it was it's completely ridiculous. While your image shows slightly more of the body, my image shows the details of it. Plus, Luffy shouldn't be in there. It's better to settle for an image that's better until a better image can be found. 00:31, January 22, 2013 (UTC)

OK so we settle for mine then. Less pixelated. 00:37, January 22, 2013 (UTC)

...Is that your only reason? The pixelation is not that big of a problem. It's really its only problem, while your image has many. It's silly to switch to a different image just because it's higher resolution. At least find an image that's detailed and doesn't have another character in it. 00:40, January 22, 2013 (UTC)

Regardless, pixelation is the biggest problem. I can see his face just fine, and the only issue is Luffy, which is not another problem. Unless you have major rebuttals, it's best to use mine and then search for another. 00:45, January 22, 2013 (UTC)

The lack of detail and inclusion of Luffy are bigger problems than a few visible pixels. He doesn't even have pupils in your image. 00:46, January 22, 2013 (UTC)

I agree with Nada here. His image has no lack of quality and has superior detail in comparison to the other one. 01:36, January 22, 2013 (UTC)

There is no lack of detail on Galaxy's image. SeaTerror (talk) 01:43, January 22, 2013 (UTC)

It's missing his scales, his pupils, his sideburns don't look as swirly, there's less shading, his eyebrows look completely different, etc. 01:48, January 22, 2013 (UTC)

Regardless, the pixelation is bad. PX, his is pixelated. Would rather have an image with a tiny problem than a terrible pixelated mess that reminds me of jpg images. 06:11, January 22, 2013 (UTC)

The pixelation is a tiny problem compared to the number of problems your image holds. I think more people would prefer a slightly low quality image over one that's barely drawn at all. You're exaggerating a bit on the pixelation, too. It's not as much of a mess than you might think. It shouldn't matter if the pixelation is "bad". Your image provides a poorly drawn, lack of detailed picture of the character that unnecessarily includes another. Do you honestly think a somewhat low resolution is worse than that? 06:53, January 22, 2013 (UTC)

Gal you can't be serious. You can't even see his eyes in that image, the animation in that image is terrible and if you hate pixelation so much just recap the image.