Talk:Four Emperors

Now, just so I know... are we going to use "Four Pirate Emperors", or are we going to use "Yonkou"? It's probably best to make sure now, so we don't have to fix stuff like we did on Wikipedia for the Shichibukai... I'd like fix up the article about the three powers, and make a category for the emperors, but I need to know what name to use. XD --Murasaki 06:44, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Hancock
I don't think "Hancock" is one of 4 emperors. Althoug the English scanlation use the word "Emperor" call Handcock as "Pirate Empress Hancock" but the truth is her name in Japanese doesn't use Kanji 皇 (Yonkou) that meaning Emperor in 4 emperor but Hadcock's name use 女帝 and 帝 that can meaning "emperor" but it just "foreign emperors" and sometime meaning "woman leader." I think it's not the same to 皇 (Yonkou).--JGV 19:18, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

"Emperors"
I know this is the popular translation, but Yonkou doesn't mean Four Emperors. It means Four Princes/Lords/Warlords/Daimyos. All of which are clearly below the rank of king. The most appropriate name would be Warlords or Daimyos, as this is supposed to be like the old Feudal Era system which seems to pop up in almost every anime.


 * I'm not good with Japanese so I'll take you for your word, even so, I think the word warlord was the closest translation, but it's already used in the sichibukai, so it wouldn't sound nice for 2 of the 3 great powers to have a recurrent word in their translated names. Not that I'm sure, it's just my take on the matter... Realdraickin

Why the recent fourth listing of the last Yonkou?
Why did the fourth listing at the bottom of the page finally get listed and why did it take so long to list? Was it because the chapter 515 and the possibility of Boa Hancock? Whats the deal with that?


 * Three things:


 * It shouldn't be on there, only list who we know
 * You shouldn't be complaining about something like that.
 * It doesn't matter how long it takes.


 * Pretty much all I can say. --One-Winged Hawk 10:06, 24 September 2008 (UTC)


 * I wasn't complaining about it I was just making a point to figure out why a forth has been listed. That is all. Reason 1 that you gave was the main point I was talking about.


 * ~Daniel


 * You'll have to excuse me there... Woke up a little grouchie due to illness. :-(


 * I don't see the point in the "unknown". Yeah there a lot of "Hancock 4 Yonkou" fans disappointed today I note. But we shouldn't list the unconfirmed, only the confirmed. I guess you could say its silly but its best to leave it off and wait like we did with the Shichibukai and others. :-/ --One-Winged Hawk 21:38, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

I think Unknown should be listed. There's really no point in not having it. Drunk Samurai 20:51, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, but I think we should check
When I look in Yonkou page, the list of Yonkou look like 1. "Red-Haired" Shanks 1. Edward Newgate ("Whitebeard") 1. Kaidou 1. Unknown I checked it code, but...

#"Red-Haired" Shanks

#1. Edward Newgate ("Whitebeard")

#1. Kaidou

#1. Unknown

Is that program error?RobertTheodore 06:18, 15 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Seems okay from my end. The list looks like this on my computer:


 * 1. "Red-Haired" Shanks
 * 2. Edward Newgate ("Whitebeard")
 * 3. Kaidou
 * 4. ok it is not confirmed but it makes sense. Garp is talking about the 4 yonkou and we see shadow pictures. big mom is the show up left with the crazy smile so know we have the 3 yonkou that are left

So guys...
Should we rename this article to "Sankou"?--24.255.171.220 15:11, March 4, 2010 (UTC)


 * Though he is dead, WB is still a Yonkou even in death. Plus we'veyet to hear them be called that. The name being dropped is the most important thing we need remember. One-Winged Hawk 15:45, March 4, 2010 (UTC)


 * It's similar to the shichibukai after Crocodile lost his title. The name remained although there were just 6 of them for a while. I think that either somebody will replace Whitebeard as a yonkou or they will be renamed. But until this change will become official, we must keep the name. El Chupacabra 16:20, March 4, 2010 (UTC)
 * Note quite. Lets say there is a bandit band consisting of 4 brothers known as the "Brothers Four" or something simular to that. One dies, killed by the local law enforcer. The group will still be the "Brothers Four" even with one dead because a dead brother is still a brother. Trouble is these days, we're so locked into the idea that there must be the number in the groups name. Mostly because its complicated to view it any other way. And I note when Shanks turns up, he is still referred to as a member of the "Yonkou" even though everyone just witnessed one of the other Yonkou die. One-Winged Hawk 10:51, March 30, 2010 (UTC)

Plagiarised?
Did anyone notice that much of this text was copied by narutofanon for their Yonkou article? http://narutofanon.wikia.com/wiki/Yonkou 67.189.204.174 03:39, March 6, 2010 (UTC)

It also shows blatent plagiarising of other anime, and laziness in general. 'Kurosaki' for example.

It doesn't hurt anyone though, it's just another load of awful Fan Fiction. SuicidalSkydiver (talk) 02:15, March 7, 2010 (UTC)


 * I second the "aweful" part. -_-' One-Winged Hawk 10:46, March 30, 2010 (UTC)

"BigMom"
Ok, for all of the people who are flooding in to add the "New" Emperor to this article, Stop. I see on the front page that this article has at least 10 editors right now all jumping in to add the SUPPOSED name of the final Emperor as told in the "Spoiler" we have right now. But there are three very important things you people need to consider:
 * 1 - This wikia has rules against posting spoiler stuff. You aren't allowed to do it until the chapter has been well and fully released
 * 2 - This particular spoiler hasn't been confirmed yet ANYWAY! Usually there are a few spoiler providers to "confirm" the spoiler, and we didn't get that this time, so this one might end up being entirely fake.
 * 3 - It's also not ok to add "BigMom" there with a strike through it that says "NOT CONFIRMED". There should be absolutely nothing there. The name should be entirely absent from the article.

So STOP Adding "BigMom" until the chapter is fully released and it's 100% confirmed that there is someone named "BigMom" in it, and that they are in fact the final Emperor. Thank You. DemonRin 06:26, April 13, 2010 (UTC)


 * "Bigmom" might also be her nickname not her actual name (in fact its obivous) going by the way Shanks and whitebeard tend to get called their nickname more then anything. One-Winged Hawk 06:49, April 13, 2010 (UTC)

Yes but whitebeard wasn't a nickname. we see in one piece people that are not very known by thier names. luffy it's known to the world of op by his nickname strawhat and so on. i'm just saying we have to consider it a possibility. i don't really know japanesse but i made several translation with a dictionary and all said bigmom


 * Actaully "whitebeard" was his nickname, his real name was "Edward Newgate". And Luffy is called "Straw Hat" quite often. One-Winged Hawk 11:43, April 13, 2010 (UTC)

Just a note: the name from the raw is, in katakana, ビッグ・マム biggu mamu. To me, it sounds like it should be "Big Mom", but maybe that's just my American English bias. Daisekihan 19:54, April 14, 2010 (UTC)

Then again, with character names like "Brandnew" and "Very Good", I wouldn't put it past Oda to have a character whose birthname is "Big Mom".24.255.171.220 18:11, April 15, 2010 (UTC)

When do you all think Kaidou and Big Mom will appear? - Copper5

They probably won't be appearing anytime soon. First the Straw hats must get to the new world cuz it looks like none of these two yonkou are coming near paradise anytime soon.

Renaming to Four Emperors
The "Four Emperors" is a proper translation for the Yonko. So it should be renamed to Four Emperors. (And "ou" is double vowels) --Klobis 04:42, May 21, 2011 (UTC)

I'm fine with it, but is there any room for discrepency in the translation? Like, is there any chance it could also translate to "Four Kings" or something like that? 04:52, May 21, 2011 (UTC)

It's true that 皇 kō means both king and emperor, but Garp said the Yonko were the great pirates like "emperors". --Klobis 05:11, May 21, 2011 (UTC)

I checked the translations and (at least the one on the page) it translates into something closer to four royals and 四皇帝 is four emperors. 05:16, May 21, 2011 (UTC)


 * Isn't that "royals" an adjective? Yonko still means four emperors. --Klobis 05:50, May 21, 2011 (UTC)

It usually is an adjective but it can also be substituted for the word royalty though that really is only present in the English vernacular, so I guess emperors is alright. 06:01, May 21, 2011 (UTC)

I am very much against renaming it to the four emperors. Yonkou, just like Shichibukai and nakama, are words that should be in japanese on this wikia. 09:33, May 21, 2011 (UTC)

Agreed. There are some words that should be left alone and this is one of them. imho. 09:40, May 21, 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, but technically, we're still having some discrepancies with "Shichibukai". I know, we said to keep it as it is, but it could be "Seven Worlds" or "Seven Warlords" or something like that. As for Yonkou, what is it written as in the Green databook? Yatanogarasu 10:04, May 21, 2011 (UTC)

I don't think it was written in the Green databook, since we still have nothing from Oda to go on. 23:00, May 21, 2011 (UTC)

Hell no. Pandawarrior said exactly what I would have said. Not to mention it would go against the inconsistency vote. SeaTerror 23:42, May 21, 2011 (UTC)


 * You gonna keep going on about that vote thing? It was said that everything was kept accordingly, and names should be kept at whatever seems right, like "Shichibukai" instead of "Seven Military Seas" or "Seven Warlords", or "Marines" instead of "Kaigun" or "Navy". We just use intuition to see what is the best fit, unless Oda said otherwise. Yatanogarasu 23:57, May 21, 2011 (UTC)
 * If you want complete consistency, why not just use Japanese text for the entire wiki? It's hard to keep consistency with all the mixture between Japanese and English Oda gives us. Yatanogarasu 23:58, May 21, 2011 (UTC)

Then renaming to "Yonko" is better? --Klobis 01:45, May 22, 2011 (UTC)

If we change Yonkou>Four Emperors then we should do the same to Shichibukai>Seven Warlords and Gorosei>Five Elders...I say leave it as it is..Sounds and looks better... 13:49, May 22, 2011 (UTC)

I still say we change it, since they have been refered to as emperors, and Yonkou is easier to translate than Shichibukai. 18:09, May 22, 2011 (UTC)

And what about the Gorosei....?? 18:15, May 22, 2011 (UTC)

I don't remember them being refered to as the "Five Elder Stars" except in the initial translation upon their introduction. 18:19, May 22, 2011 (UTC)

Yonkou is a title of the 4 great pirates from the New World, as long as it is a title, it shouldn't be translated, also many users are used to the word and use it frequently as it is easier to write than Four Emperors. Ricizubi 18:34 (UTC)

Convenience and ease are not the issue here. The issue is whether or not the page should be changed to its actual translation. 20:21, May 22, 2011 (UTC)

No title should ever be translated. SeaTerror 23:40, May 22, 2011 (UTC)

I have no opinion, shichibukai only retains its name from wikipedia because of the 4Kids protest. Shichibukai was chosen as a protest against being forced to adopt the 4Kids version when we were at wikipedia. There was a big argument about it along with if it should be Zolo or Zoro at wikipedia. When we came here, we were more focused on getting set up then debating so like the Marines, we just had a quick vote or whatever we did and agreed upon the name. Since its what... 2004? The vote hardly stands when we're a wikia of about hundred instead of less then a dozen like we were then. Honestly, we if everyone wants to revote on shichibukai, they should say so. The same rule applies here.

This wikia has always suffered from "fans of the Japanese version" mentality, to the point at times we don't challenge anything even if the version is up is wrong. Its only recently we've started doing anything like that. Some of the guidelines related to this are out of date by now anyway... One-Winged Hawk 00:17, May 23, 2011 (UTC)

I am strongly against the renaming of the Yonkou page to the Four Emperors. People have been using that term for a long time and it's sound better than the English term just like we keep using the term Shikibukai.FoolishMortalFOOL 01:40, May 23, 2011 (UTC)

That's completely wrong. The reason Shichibukai retains its name is because that is what most fansubbers use. SeaTerror 03:19, May 23, 2011 (UTC)

Fansubbers also use Jimbei, but we know that isn't right. 15:45, May 23, 2011 (UTC)

Wrong again. Once it was revealed to be Jinbe they changed it. They did the same with other names. SeaTerror 18:43, May 23, 2011 (UTC)

Fansubbers are 'unofficial, and therefore cannot be taken as official argument. Shichibukai stays as it is due to the Green Databook being unclear of it's Warlord or Worlds, due to that cutoff on the page, we'll change it accordingly once Oda brings up a clearer name. But for Yonkou, I suggest changing it to Four Emperors, like Fishman Karate instead of "Gyojin Karate" or Black Leg Style instead of "Kuroashi no Waza". This also brings up the Santoryu instead of "Three Swords Style". Yatanogarasu 05:50, May 25, 2011 (UTC)

Neither can official companies who translate worse than fansubbers. Yonkou should remain Yonkou because that is 1) What people are use to.

2) What most fansubbers use.

3) No title should ever be translated. SeaTerror 16:14, May 26, 2011 (UTC)

So, should we change it to Gyojin Karate, Kuroashi no Waza, and so on as well? This is just like the nakama thing all over again. Yatanogarasu 23:57, May 26, 2011 (UTC)

The only difference between Yonkou and Nakama is that Yonkou keeps its definition both in translation and context, whereas nakama seems to have a meaning in One Piece other than just friend. 03:54, May 27, 2011 (UTC)

Yep. Or else revote on inconsistency for English only or Japanese only. Except the previous vote said certain exceptions are allowed. SeaTerror 05:29, May 27, 2011 (UTC)

So, should we move this section to a forum, or should we start voting here (or at a forum)? Yatanogarasu 02:46, May 28, 2011 (UTC)

Alright, talk over, it's "Yonko" for now. 22:23, June 5, 2011 (UTC)

No. Fuck that. That's pure bullshit. The talk isn't over just because Klobis moved the goddamn page. SeaTerror 21:27, June 7, 2011 (UTC)

Ehm yeah...or in other words: this topic is by no means over, at least I fail to see the consensus here. 20:09, June 8, 2011 (UTC)

I say we leave it for now and come back to it later. 20:34, June 8, 2011 (UTC)

Old Piracy
I believe Linlin was from the previous era, because she calls Garp by his given name rather than with his title too. This shows that Linlin was at the same level as Garp in the past so there is no reason for her to call him like people in the new era.Zero62422002 15:54, December 26, 2011 (UTC)

Not enough evidence to support that. She simply could have known his name. Remember, the whole world learned his, Dragon, and Luffy's family name after Sengoku announced it. She could have learned it then for all we know. 16:02, December 26, 2011 (UTC)

Was Gol D. Roger a Yonko, then?

Chapter/Episode on Yonko Stalemate
Please, what chapter or episode tell us about Yonko stalemate? I believe I've read/heard that, but I can't remember in what chapter/episode.

I've just read this page and seen it talk about that Yonko situation:

"With the Yonko stuck in a deadlock situation, this allowed the world to remain stable."

But there is no source unfortunately. Alelucas (talk) 04:27, May 18, 2013 (UTC)

The fact that they consider themselves enemies yet are not in direct confrontation is indicative of a stalemate. It's common sense. 04:54, May 18, 2013 (UTC)

Ah! OK! Thanks! So there is no manga-anime statement of it that I can use or quote, right? Alelucas (talk) 05:28, May 18, 2013 (UTC)

(by the World Government)
Is that clarification really necessary? Not only the World Government thinks they are the world's strongest pirates, also all other pirates, Marines, people and any character in the series seem to agree. Or have they ever mentioned or at least hinted that might exists a stronger pirate to make necessary this clarification?

Manuel de la Fuente (talk) 14:25, May 20, 2013 (UTC)