Talk:Bartholomew Kuma

Dead Characters?
Shouldn't he be placed under the category Dead Characters? His body is still moving, but he's a robot now, he is no longer alive.

I really don't want to get into a debate on what it means to be alive. The way I see it, he still has a pulse, so he ain't dead yet. 17:26, February 21, 2013 (UTC)

How do you even know he has a pulse? He's like 90% robot, they could easily have removed his heart. The fact that he doesn't have a mind of his own basically means he is brain-dead, which is the same as dead.

He's still walking and active in the world, people still identify him as Kuma, and he's not a zombie. That's good enough for me to consider him totally alive. 17:44, February 21, 2013 (UTC)

Exactly. For all we know he was just labotomized. If he's walking around and not a zombie, that's enough to call him alive. 17:51, February 21, 2013 (UTC)

I believe until 'his body is alive' we should not consider him dead. 19:00, February 21, 2013 (UTC)

He has been called 'dead' by several characters, even he himself said they wont be seeing each other anymore, and just because he's walking doesn't make him alive since he's a robot.

They meant dead in a figurative sense, since his old personality was no more. If you go by that, then half the straw hats were dead for a few chapters when Law switched their bodies. 19:09, February 21, 2013 (UTC)

^ thats a completely invalid argument, since those half of the strawhats still had consciousness, just in different bodies.

We will consider him dead when his body gets destroyed. 19:13, February 21, 2013 (UTC)

Kuma is mostly dead, but that doesn't mean he's all dead. There's a big difference between mostly dead and all dead. Mostly dead is slightly alive. 16:56, February 22, 2013 (UTC)

^He is about as alive as an organ doner corpse that's hooked up to a heart-lung machine and is waiting for organ extraction. Probably even less alive, since most of his body is machine also. Just because the cells in your body are alive, doesnt mean you are 'alive'. You are dead if you no longer have a consciousness.

Look we're not going to have some medical ethical debate on a cartoon encyclopedia. It's ultimately better to keep it simple by saying he's still alive. 14:11, March 8, 2016 (UTC)

Hey, everyone. Chose quite the topic for my 1st outloud opinion on the fandom, it seems. My view on the subject is as follows: When a DF user dies, the fruit would reincarnate somewhere(on the grand line if I'm not wrong), and if its user/powers made a big name for themselves, each and every person would use any means necessary to obtain it(Mera-Mera no mi and Yami-Yami no mi acquisition stories, anyone?). As such, if Kuma actually dies and becomes an entirely robotic being, his terribly infamous DF would surely reappear and be sought after via even nastier methods than with the aforementioned fruits, especially with Doflamingo out of the picture. All aside, I'm thinking Kuma has planned a "reawakening" of sorts in advance like the master of deception he is. Dratinimaster (talk) 08:24, 1 December 2021 (UTC)

Honestly, at this point I don't think that Kuma should be considered alive. It was ambiguous for a while since we didn't really have a full picture with what was going on with him, but the way Bonney and Vegapunk describe him throughout Egghead make it very clear that Kuma is regarded as dead in-universe. Vegapunk explicitly tells Bonney that there's no way to bring him back. Vegapunk says he had a lot of moral reservations about what he did to Kuma and that he really didn't want to go through with it, which would not be the case if there was some secret scheme that could have saved Kuma's life. Kuma removed his own memories before he was fully turned into a robot, which shows that he didn't think there would be any need for him to have them going forward. Bonney when she's trying to take on Kuma's memory says that she needs to do this so that she can move on. There's a lot we still don't know about Kuma right now, but in-universe he is unambiguously regarded as dead. His body is still "alive" but for all intents and purposes, Kuma is gone

Infobox
If Vergo's infobox is using Donquixote Pirate colors instead of Marine colors then why isn't this page using Revolutionary Army colors? Donquixote and Revolutionary are their real loyalties, while Marines/Shichibukai are just fronts. So why the real affliation for Vergo but the fake one for Kuma? 96.253.11.153 15:53, December 17, 2013 (UTC)


 * P.S. Thanks for reverting an obviously non-malicious edit without explainig why. Editors like you are why people just make fun of the errors on this wiki instead of trying to fix them.

He doesn't have his personality any more (he attacked Ivankov during the war), so with the information we have at the moment Shichbukai colours are most appropriate. Vergo actually attacked Marines, did Doflamingo's work for him, covered up the incidents at sea etc, whereas the don't have any evidence of Kuma doing Revolutionary stuff since his "death". 16:06, December 17, 2013 (UTC)

Which Brother?
This is something that hit me as I watched the English Dub of Thriller Bark—do we really know that Kuma didn't know about Sabo? This article later brings up that he made no reaction to the reveal of Ace's relation back at Marineford, but at the time he had finally lost his personality. So would it be reasonable to link both as a subtle forshadowing? Either way I'm more happy for finding it, but it'd make sense to put it up. 137.150.222.154 00:32, April 19, 2015 (UTC)

Kuma may have not cared. I don't even know if we should do that

Joekido (talk) 00:37, April 19, 2015 (UTC)

Eh, no biggie; 'Twas only a suggestion within my own realization. Considering the spoilerific nature, I'd almost say just having the dubious nature of his comment being noted in Trivia versus in his specific comment. He is there when Sabo is picked up, I see no reason why he wouldn't know about either of them.

The only way it'd get confirmed would be if someone asked Oda via SBS, or if Nami puts the pieces together once she hears about Sabo. *shrug* More importantly, thanks for the speedy response! 137.150.222.154 00:48, April 19, 2015 (UTC)

Neither Brother
After going through the page again (and the specific additions of brother—successfully attempted or not), if we can't say for sure that he was referring to Sabo, then we definitely can't say Ace either. Thus far Kuma has had no contact with Ace to our knowledge, whereas Kuma met Sabo as a child and is more likely to know of Sabo as Luffy's brother than Ace.

More importantly, the source-adding of the third link above (compared to the former two made closer to the original comment during Thriller Bark, and the latter one being speculative and eventually removed) does not predate the source of Doflamingo revealing Kuma to be effectively 'dead' during the War (specific link incoming, but copying the text of the modern Source [2] and searching for it in the 3rd link does find it). Therefore, the reason he wouldn't say anything isn't that he already knows, but because even if he was surprised he simply couldn't.

Therefore, there isn't conclusive evidence either way, and thus overall the page should be changed to reflect that (AKA the removing the link to Ace's page from asking if Luffy had a brother, correction of his Relationship pages, etc). 137.150.222.154 06:16, April 28, 2015 (UTC)

UPDATE—Not only is it old, but apparently its even older because it sat with bad grammar until December 2009 so, yeah... Massively predates the tacked-on source that makes no sense in combination. 137.150.222.154 03:22, April 30, 2015 (UTC)

Post Timeskip image
Is there a need for one now that Kuma has returned to his pre timeskip appearance? Sarutobii2 (talk) 09:36, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

Kuma's age
Something had been bugging me for awhile after seeing Kuma with Bonney as a kid and seeing Kuma at age 25 Kuma at age 25 seems to have his glass-like eyes, yet Kuma holding Bonney lacks those eyes...yet Bonney was born when Kuma was 23 years old, 2 years before he joined the revolutionary army...meaning that young bonney with young kuma is after Kuma joined the revolutionary army, but then why are his eyes different? XXMension04Xx (talk) 16:43, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

Personality reordering
Believe it or not, KingCannon, no, I am not acting out of "pettiness" with that intro paragraph. If I was, I'd keep on trying to delete it. I don't disagree with your assertion that it's true; that being said, your argument of it being "introductory to Kuma's general persona" doesn't really work since now we know that that's not is "general persona," it's merely how he seemed to be when he was introduced. It's not who he was originally, and more importantly, it's not who he is now (that being a mindless machine). As such, it doesn't make sense for that to be his introductory paragraph when at this point it's simply" what we learned about him first."

Also, please knock it off with "reporting for vandalism." You know this isn't vandalism, cut that out. Making good faith edits that you don't agree with is not "vandalism." If anything, undoing those edits without good explanation creates more of a case for vandalism than what I'm doing.

So unless you can give me a valid argument that his stern personality he showed at Thriller Bark is who he's always been and/or who he is now, I'll be putting it back in the Thriller Bark section where it belongs. The Pope 19:14, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

Just split the section to subsections like:
 * 1) Childhood and Young Adulthood - Birth till Revolutionary (Nika belief, hatred of WG, love of Ginny, pursuit of justice, raged after Ginny's kidnapping...)
 * 2) Peranthood - Bonny till Vegapunk (protective, playful, kind, anger at Bekori, infamy and search for cur...)
 * 3) Pacifista - During and re-slavehood (stoic, secretive, ambiguous loyalty...)

Rhavkin (talk) 19:32, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

It is generally good practice to start a personality section with a summary of a character's primary traits, particularly for the more complex characters. However, we cannot simply start from the very moment he was a child because a) adult Kuma is not necessarily the same as kid Kuma and b) that's a crapload of development that runs the risk of overwhelming the reader with information that may no longer be relevant, and we cannot use current Kuma's personality because he's more or less a mindless robot right now.

That's why I simply use pre-timeskip Kuma's personality as a basis (because newer readers are more likely to be familiar with that Kuma and it's the latest time where he still had some form of free will), mention that the character is very complex at the end of the paragraph (the setup) and from there I start exploring the developments he went through from childhood (second paragraph) to his current self (final one). This is all to guarantee a good, understandable flow.

It makes no sense to have a "Thriller Bark" section because personalities cannot be defined chronologically and runs the risk of coming off as a glorified History section, which is a problem the wiki always has had that often led to overlapping info.

Furthermore, in case the personality section needs further expanding, we may need to break it down in specific subsections like we did to Kaidou, Big Mom, Doflamingo, etc. At that point, the initial summary becomes even more helpful. KingCannon (talk) 19:52, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

Generally true (thou newer readers would not be familiar with many things and it is a in the spoiler rules second paragraph that current events are not spoilers), however since Kuma has gone through two-three major events that drastically changes his personality, I think this can be an exception to the rule. I understand your point and would suggest adding an opening paragraph before the first section, which explains the split:


 * Due to the transformation into a Pacifista, Kuma's personality has been seemingly erased. Beforehand, Kuma has experienced major turmoils that greatly effected his behavior on multiple aspects...

As for the chronologically point, while there isn't a rule against it, most characters do have their more prominent trait first, but Kuma personality is a special case. I could argue that the kind, generous Kuma is the main trait, while the anger and vengeful is due to past circumstance, and that the blind loyalty to the WG is not even his true self, given what we currently know. Rhavkin (talk) 20:20, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

I could consider that, at least in a more generic manner. I think it is fair to mention that this personality has underwent several changes. KingCannon (talk) 20:27, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

The article should be presented as if someone who has never read One Piece once is reading about him for the first time. Leading with "here's how he was at one certain point that was completely at odds to how he was the rest of his life" isn't helpful at all, even if that's how the rest of us were introduced to him. Kuma is a peculiar case, seeing how his personality has shifted so radically throughout his life. If you must lead with some kind of generalizing paragraph, then it should be when his personality was the most genuine, i.e. how he was around Ginny and Bonney, i.e. a selfless pacifist.

Oh, and this was glossed over KingCannon, but I really do not appreciate the notion of "you made an edit I disagree with, that means you're committing vandalism", and I really do not care for the implication that if I keep making edits that you personally disagree with that you'll "report me and have my account banned." If someone makes a good faith edit that you don't like, consider either manually tweaking the aspects you'd rather be left alone, or take it to the Talk page (like you forced me to do), rather than just slamming the undo button. Now THAT is petty. The Pope 23:18, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

If the idea is that it has to take in account first time readers, then the current still works best because again, it doesn't overload the reader with massive amounts of information that would be put at odds with his current loss of personality. It is why I think what we have now is a good introductory paragraph that doesn't really need to go over the more (and many) specific details, since it presents them in a generic enough manner that will be expanded further down.

And really, the only reason I undid it the first time is that a plentiful amount of information (that was not wrong in the first place) was suddenly deleted for no particular reason given. Whenever that happens, a reasoning should at least be written down. You completely rearranged a whole section and took out correct information without necessarily rewriting it, so I believed that was worth of scrutiny. KingCannon (talk) 00:32, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

I removed it the first time because it just felt like a basic rundown of "things he did at Thriller Bark" rather than an accurate description of his personality. You countered with "these things are still true", so I said "fine" and moved them to where they made more sense, down in the Thriller Bark section. And that was the point where you claimed I was performing "vandalism."

And, again, that first paragraph isn't indicative of his actual personality. You don't need to "overload" the reader; you just have a basic synopsis of "he's a kind, good guy who's selfless", then you get into all of the nitty gritty details further down. The Pope 00:57, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

A "basic rundown of things" is always useful, especially for a rather long section like that. Plus, it's not just things he only did at Thriller Bark, it was his entire character through several arcs, including Jaya and Sabaody. And chronologically the last time he had any semblance of a personality.

The first paragraph also hints enough that Kuma is a "kind, good guy" without needing to elaborate on it, just like it also states that he is currently mindless without needing to elaborate on it. Leave the following paragraphs to elaborate without needing to sacrifice flow. The second third AND fourth paragraphs already mention his kindness, and we don't need further redundacy.KingCannon (talk) 01:20, 10 December 2023 (UTC)