Talk:Gally

Confirmation
I just need to know if the bounty on this page is indeed correct or made up. (Have not seen the Copper Movie). --One-Winged Hawk 19:28, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Here.Mugiwara Franky 02:40, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

JUMP Super Anime Tour: One Piece - ROMANCE DAWN
Offical Website:

http://www.jumpland.com/animetour/op/index_en.html

It looks AWESOME! Especially since Brook's going to be in it, and Franky too, and all the other Straw Hats! - BattleFranky202 04:32, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Name Spelling
Umm, his name is spelled Gally in the Romance Dawn Story, not Galley. As such, I changed the reasoning that said "the other one was spelled Gally, and this is spelled Galley, so that signifies they are different people". It was spelled Gally on his wanted poster, so should there be a name change (at least to the in article spellings)? Nightmare Pirates (talk) 08:28, August 26, 2018 (UTC)

Merge
I see no reason to consider Galley and Gally different characters. The reasoning for the separation is extremely flimsy. Same name, same epithet, same basic design. The anime appearance at the end of WCI arc even uses the color scheme from the previous anime cameo instead of the Romance Dawn Story version. These should be merged under single article titled Gally, which would cover every adaptation of the character. 13:15, October 12, 2019 (UTC)
 * Names: It seems that "different names" was used as evidence in the past, but the spelling Gally is used for both. There is no reason to have this article under a different name.
 * Bounties: Currently the only argument is "different bounties". However, bounties can easily change and both bounties are non-canon.

The name doesn't matter. They are different characters because they appeared in different things. One being filler and the other appearing in a prototype from Oda. Especially because they both have different histories. SeaTerror (talk) 17:38, October 12, 2019 (UTC)

It seems to me that Gally is just a reference to Galley from to one shot, and giving the fact Galley was partly canonize at the end of WCI, I think they should stay separated. Rhavkin (talk) 18:54, October 12, 2019 (UTC)

I think they should stay separated but there's no sense in keeping them under two different names while they're both called ギャリー (Gyarī, romanized as "Gally" on wanted posters). Cdwp22 (talk) 19:23, October 12, 2019 (UTC)

So every time a character appears in filler it's actually a different character? So we need "Foxy (Filler)" because he's appeared in non-canon naterial and an article for one-shot versions of Luffy etc.? Doesn't make any sense. The filler appearance is the same kind of cameo as Gally's appearance at Baratie, which is covered on the same article as the prototype Gally. 19:56, October 12, 2019 (UTC)

You can't be serious. That was clearly the same Foxy. Here it is not defiantly the same character. Rhavkin (talk) 20:11, October 12, 2019 (UTC)

It definitely is. "Crescent-Moon Gally". In fact the anime used the same color scheme for Gally's canon apperance as they did for the filler cameo (Image), rather than the one they used in the adaptation of Romance Dawn. Anime having multiple designs for a character is nothing new and has never resulted in separate articles. 20:28, October 12, 2019 (UTC)

So it's the same character because the anime colored both the same way, and it is also the guy from the one one shot despite the anime colored them differently? Rhavkin (talk) 20:52, October 12, 2019 (UTC)

It's the same character because it's Crescent-Moon Gally. I just explained why design differences don't warrant a separate article or prove it's somehow a different character. But if we're arguing designs the split would be "Romance Dawn Story Gally" vs. the rest, since that one sticks out the most. Of course no articles based on anime design/color differences make any sense, which is why everything should be under one article in this instance as well. 21:07, October 12, 2019 (UTC)

We have separate pages for characters with the same name, the same epithet, or both (Mr. 7\Mr. 7 (Previous)). We keep going back to the points you claimed in the beginning do not matter, but apparently they are. Rhavkin (talk) 21:29, October 12, 2019 (UTC)

If a character appears in filler we do not assume it's actually a different character who just happens to have the exact the same name. The existence of two "Mr. 7"s has been established within the series. 21:37, October 12, 2019 (UTC)

But this isn't a "character appears in filler" case, this is a "filler character appears in story". And the Mr. 7s were an example of two separate pages of two separate characters with same known identity, not different canon status. 21:49, October 12, 2019 (UTC)