User talk:Manuel de la Fuente

re:Mr. 4
I thought it was too vague and general to belong there. I felt like it could be applied to any to fat characters. 04:11, November 22, 2012 (UTC)

re:Haki
Because it is incorrect to refer to Pekoms as an animal in the same way as the alpaca or the dugongs. The alpaca is an object Zoan, the dugongs speak for themselves, and we don't frankly know what Pekoms is. He may look like an animal, but he doesn't walk, talk, or act like one, therefore we cannot call him one in confidence as was done there. 22:03, September 8, 2014 (UTC)

He's a lion, but he's not an animal. He's on some middleground between human and animal. If you disagree, I invite you to compare Pekoms to Agyo. We can't call him human but we can't call him an animal. We can call him a humanoid lion until we learn what his species is. 23:00, September 8, 2014 (UTC)

Pappug's ability to talk was actually explained. Your other two examples are incapable of actual speech. And we don't know if he was a lion to begin with. For all we know he's one of the minkmen we've only heard about. Saying he's an animal who learned human speech and became bipedal is complete speculation. 23:33, September 8, 2014 (UTC)

Re:"Citizens" vs "inhabitants of Flevance"
I thought that "citizens" was a tad vague, though you could change "inhabitants of Flevance" to "citizens of Flevance" or something else that would be more clearer if you want. 00:51, October 3, 2014 (UTC)