Talk:First Twenty

Manmayer Family and the existence of branch families
We have to talk about this because it feels like a bunch of speculations with mistaken reasoning behind it.

I can agree that having stuff like Jaygarcia Family or Ethanbaron Family may be too early to include here, but that's only because the terms themselves do not exist explicitly in the manga. We would be technically making up terms based solely on character names, which is a no-no. The Manmayer Family, however, should not be categorized similarly, since its existence is explicit.

I cannot accept however that a content moderator utilize their own speculations as proof of something. There was never anything in the series that ever hinted at the existence of branch families or whatever. The first paragraph of the World Noble page outright states: "The World Nobles...are the aristocratic descendants of nineteen of the First Twenty who established what is now known as the World Government". This is an explicit statement that exists in the manga, and so far has never been proven to the contrary. KingCannon (talk) 16:59, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Just because all the World Nobles are descended from the First Twenty doesn't mean they use the same names they did originally; hence the possibility of branch families.

If we don't consider that there could be branch families, then the Jaygarcia, Ethanbaron, etc. families would definitely be the names of founding members, even if the explicit "X Family" name isn't necessarily canon; there would be no reason not to just list them as "Jaygarcia Ancestor", "Ethanbaron Ancestor", etc. You'll notice, as well, that the Figarland Family isn't listed here, because we don't know for sure that "Figarland" was a name used by any of the First Twenty.

Also, regarding "I cannot accept however that a content moderator utilize their own speculations as proof of something." - As I pointed out, the standard since June has been to not include families that weren't explicitly mentioned, at which point it was uncontested. If you disagree with it now, and have people who disagree with you, it's your job to begin the discussion instead of repeatedly adding it. Walrsu (talk) 17:05, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Please, tell me where was this decided, because I cannot find this discussion from June. KingCannon (talk) 17:10, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

By the way:

"Just because all the World Nobles are descended from the First Twenty doesn't mean they use the same names they did originally; hence the possibility of branch families."

This is also incredibly speculative. Why are we suddenly accepting that the World Nobles are not using their names as before? We cannot treat speculations as canon just because they're possible. No one in the manga ever stated they could be using different names.

Again, I want proof that those branch families are a thing, and not just something made up because of "possibilities". KingCannon (talk) 17:14, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

The change was first made here and nobody contested it, and it's been enforced a few times since. There was no discussion because nobody said they disagreed with the change; if somebody had, then it would have been Klobis' responsibility to begin a discussion.

"No one in the manga ever stated they could be using different names." And nobody ever stated they definitely aren't. Not listing the Manmayer Family isn't the same as assuming they used a different name, it's just making it clear that we don't know if they did or not. While I do agree that it's likely they used the same names, it's not confirmed either way.

"Again, I want proof that those branch families are a thing" - the burden of proof is on you, since you want to change the standard. I can respond with the exact same thing - I want proof that there definitely aren't branch families, and not just an assumption that there have been no changes in 800 years. Walrsu (talk) 17:17, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

I already showed proof:. It is the first paragraph of the World Noble page:

The World Nobles, also known as the Celestial Dragons (天竜人), are the aristocratic descendants of nineteen of the First Twenty who established what is now known as the World Government.

The source is Pappag on Chapter 497.

I have yet however, to be shown proof of the contrary. Klobis simply appeared in the revision history and said "Speculation. Could be branch families" without any sort of elaboration about where exactly that came from.

This is the "standard" you are following? Can you show me the actual discussion that took place and decided the standard? Or was it just something went with because klobis said so? KingCannon (talk) 17:37, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

As I said above, "Just because all the World Nobles are descended from the First Twenty doesn't mean they use the same names they did originally; hence the possibility of branch families."

This is the standard because nobody disagreed with it. There was no discussion because nobody disagreed. What's the point of a discussion if it's immediately resolved because everybody agrees with the change? Walrsu (talk) 17:29, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

So in the end, there was no actual discussion to decide a "standard". Ok.

But again:

As I said above, "Just because all the World Nobles are descended from the First Twenty doesn't mean they use the same names they did originally; hence the possibility of branch families."

This is not a good argument. It is completely speculative, and no one in the manga has ever supported it. I have already provided a source for someone who outright says the World Nobles are descendants of the Creators. I am still waiting for actual proof that branch families are a thing that someone in the manga mentions, not based on standards decided by an uncontested user. KingCannon (talk) 17:35, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Here's an idea. Try contacting Klobis and ask him why he thought branch families are a thing that we should consider. Since this discussion began with him being uncontested, it's only fair he gives his side to it.

Since this is about contesting ideas, then I am doing so now.

I also do not agree that standards can be created just because stuff gets uncontested. Never mind that this is a big wiki where plenty of stuff can get overlooked. And it's not like Klobis is a mod or anything anymore to have his word become law, especially since he did not elaborate on his action.KingCannon (talk) 17:37, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Again, as I stated before: ''"No one in the manga ever stated they could be using different names." And nobody ever stated they definitely aren't. Not listing the Manmayer Family isn't the same as assuming they used a different name, it's just making it clear that we don't know if they did or not.''

As an example, listing the Manmayer Family is speculative, because it's never been stated that there was a member of the First Twenty who went by Manmayer. NOT listing the Manmayer Family is neutral, since it doesn't mean they weren't included, it just means we don't know if they were included.

''This is not a good argument. It is completely speculative, and no one in the manga has ever supported it. I have already provided a source for someone who outright says the World Nobles are descendants of the Creators.''

How is saying they use different names speculative but saying they use the same name not? We don't refer to Carol as "Carol Masterson", even though her father's name is Daddy Masterson, because we don't know if that's the name she goes by. The same is true of the Manmayer or Figarland families; we don't know if that's what they went by 800 years ago, so it's speculative to list them.

If we don't consider that there could be branch families, then the Jaygarcia, Ethanbaron, etc. families would definitely be the names of founding members, even if the explicit "X Family" name isn't necessarily canon; there would be no reason not to just list them as "Jaygarcia Ancestor", "Ethanbaron Ancestor", etc.

You also never responded to this. If we decide that the World Nobles are definitely using the same names as 800 years ago like you're suggesting, then why would the Elders be any different? They're still World Nobles.

The way it's set up now, we add them if it's explicitly stated that a member of a family was a member of the First Twenty (like the Donquixote Family's ancestor) or if one of the First Twenty is directly named (like Nerona Imu and Nefertari Lili). This minimizes speculation, since these people have been explicitly stated to be part of the First Twenty. Adding anything else is speculation.

I would like Klobis to respond to this, but whether he does or not isn't the deciding factor here; I also think we should consider branch families, so his reasons are irrelevant. Discussions come about because people have disagreements. If a change is made without disagreements, even without elaboration, there's no point in holding a discussion. In the same way, you attempted to add the Manmayer Family to the list today; a fair edit to make. However, there were disagreements, hence a discussion. The job of creating a discussion is up to the person making a change, if there are disagreements; there were no disagreements in June, so there was no need for discussion. Walrsu (talk) 17:49, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Can't you just add this as a trivia? Something like:
 * While the family names of some of the World Nobles were reveled, and it is stated that they are the decedents of 19 of the 20 families, it is yet to be confirmed if those families share the names through the ages, and if those were the names of the first twenty.
 * The families include the Figarland, Jaygarcia, Marcus, Topman, Ethanbaron, Shepherd, and Manmayer families.

Rhavkin (talk) 18:19, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

"How is saying they use different names speculative but saying they use the same name not?"

Because the whole reason the World Nobles are nobles to begin with is because they carry the name of thier ancestors? Like, why would they change their names? It doesn't really make sense considering the prideful nobles. Even as a possibility, it's a very shaky one, and just because it technically exists, it shouldn't be considered. I could very well say Robin has fish-man blood because her father could be a fishman. It is a possibility after all, and you can't disprove it, can you?.

If you want to use possibilities as arguments, at least have some believable logic in them. It's one thing to want to minimize speculation because there are no explicit statements about whether the family is one of the First Twenty. It is another to use completely made up arguments that were started by an user and came on to be accepted because no one contested it.

In my view, it makes no sense to consider the Manmayer Family not one of the First Twenty. First because we know the World Nobles are all descended from the First Twenty, and because the Manmayer Family is an actual term that exists in-universeto describe a World Noble family. Those are two explicit things that should make up an explicit fact through logic. I extend the same thoughts towards the Figarland Family.

And let's be real, if Klobis hadn't added that "branch family" thing there, we wouldn't be discussing what counts as the First Twenty or not. He completely made up a possibility that was never under consideration at any point ãnd was never elaborated upon and for some reason the wiki just decided to take it as valid. This is worth of criticism, in my opinion. KingCannon (talk) 19:50, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Because the whole reason the World Nobles are nobles to begin with is because they carry the name of their ancestors

They're nobles because they're descended from the First Twenty, the name isn't the requirement. Doflamingo continued having the name "Donquixote", and they still didn't allow him to return.

Even if you don't want to agree that branch families should be considered, which is fine, but this point still stands: ''As an example, listing the Manmayer Family is speculative, because it's never been stated that there was a member of the First Twenty who went by Manmayer. NOT listing the Manmayer Family is neutral, since it doesn't mean they weren't included, it just means we don't know if they were included.''

If it's not stated that there is a member of the First Twenty using the name Manmayer, then it makes more sense to simply not include them in the list. That doesn't mean there isn't a Manmayer, it just means we don't know, as I mentioned above and you ignored.

And again, the fact that nobody disagreed implies that others agreed. If somebody disagreed with his point about branch families, they should have brought it up, either at that point or since then; essentially, what you're doing now. Then a discussion can be had, since there's disagreement.

On another note, I think something like what Rhavkin suggested is a good idea. Having some comment about why not every World Noble family is listed ("We don't know if they continued using the same names over time") with a list of the families not listed is a good way to have it clearly defined. Walrsu (talk) 20:01, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

I agree with Walrsu that we should err on the side of caution. The series has presented—through Sterry, York, and the Five Elders—the potential for non-descendants to be raised to World Nobles. Although it's unknown if this has been done before or even would be done, it does mean that we cannot say for certain if every World Noble's family name is taken from among the First Twenty's names. I do think we should list only those identified outright in the series. Dragonus Nesha (talk) 21:57, 29 October 2023 (UTC)