File talk:Sabo Anime Infobox.png

Edit war
Okay pretty straight forward. original full body shot or a half body shot with his hat on. My reason for supporting the hat photo is simple. it's part of Sabo's iconic appearance and the images are of equal quality, with the exception of not being full body. To me that should absolutely take priority over showing his entire body, because we already have an image that showcases his full appearance [hat included]. It's unnecessary to show his lower half in lieu of his legitimate appearance. Sabo always wears his hat.. the exception in the image is that he was in the process of changing. --Mandon (talk) 21:14, February 15, 2015 (UTC)

The hat is on the article multiple times so no it isn't needed for this one. The full body image is much better. Only issue is it's low quality which can be easily fixed. SeaTerror (talk) 21:17, February 15, 2015 (UTC)

Total agreement with ST. And I expect others will say the same, making this a fast discussion. 21:18, February 15, 2015 (UTC)

Also agree.

21:19, February 15, 2015 (UTC)

That's not the point ST. We're using an image that doesn't showcase Sabo accurately, which is the whole point of an infobox image. If it wasn't, why are we using an image from the Strong World credits for Ace's infobox? Lord knows there are plenty of full body images we could use from Marineford or flashbacks. But we don't, because it's the highest quality image that also shows his trademark appearance [Hat, boots and knife]. --Mandon (talk) 21:31, February 15, 2015 (UTC)

Hmm. I think you have a point there, but we don't have as many images of Sabo to choose from yet. This may be the best we can manage for now.

21:39, February 15, 2015 (UTC)

This "trademark appearance" is very, very subjective. Especially for a character who has only appeared on one arc as an adult. He's got the goggles, which to me is more than enough. And this is the first image to show his whole body from the anime, should we really take it down because of a top hat that's in every other image? I really don't think so.

There is no rule about "trademark appearance" we use the "best available" and the full body one is just that: the best available. 21:43, February 15, 2015 (UTC)

I'm going to support the fullbody, since it is the best available, who cares about the hat? There's a lot of images with him and his hat, the hat don't make a difference at all. 21:45, February 15, 2015 (UTC)

These things always look better when they're those "facing the camera" full body shots. I'm in favor of the hatless pic. 22:07, February 15, 2015 (UTC)

Seems like a clear majority to me. I'm gonna close this now. 22:08, February 15, 2015 (UTC)

Edit war PT 2
Similar case as before. original full body shot or a half body shot with his hat on

My reasons remain the same as before. Infoboxes are meant to display a character's iconic appearance accurately. We don't use one for Ace even though plenty of fullbody images are available in the Marineford arc. The same goes for many other characters, and I don't see why that should be the case now. Sabo is never seen with his hat off and goggles worn around his neck, therefore it shouldn't be used for his infobox now that a better image is available. --Mandon (talk) 16:07, March 29, 2015 (UTC)

Full body picture is better. 16:09, March 29, 2015 (UTC)

Already has hat in the gallery and throughout the article. Same as discussed before. I prefer the full body picture. 16:15, March 29, 2015 (UTC)

Full body picture is generally better. 17:09, March 29, 2015 (UTC)

I don't like the proposal. I prefer the full body one. But hey we might get a better full body pic with his hat on next week. 17:10, March 29, 2015 (UTC)

Full-body does look better compared to a half-shot, like mentioned above I'm sure there will be better angles in the future. AsuraDrago 21:29, March 29, 2015 (UTC)

Clear majority. 22:44, March 29, 2015 (UTC)

Full body versus Hat
I feel like I've made this case several times and there isn't really much else for me to do except repeat my previous arguments. Fullbody is not necessary for an infobox image. People will bring up the "we have plenty of images of him wearing the hat" argument but the exact same logic can be applied to his full body appearance. The hat is an iconic part of Sabo's design and it should be shown in his infobox image. Not including it is like using a picture of Luffy without his straw hat. Anyways, here is the image for reference. Please keep in mind that it's cropped, so it'll appear lower res than the original. It looks fine zoomed out. --Mandon (talk) 08:49, February 14, 2016 (UTC)

Eh, I still prefer the fullbody one we have. And I don't agree that Sabo w/ hat is as iconic and necessary as Luffy w/ hat, given that one of them has had far more screentime than the other and is thus more recognized (in addition to having the hat be part of his epithet).--Xilinoc (talk) 16:52, February 14, 2016 (UTC)

Sabo's only been seen without his hat twice. Once while he was at home and forced to wear clothes his parents gave him, and again while he was getting changed. I think it'd be hard to argue that his hat isn't an integral part of his design, like say.. Nami and Robin's PTS outfits, which are constantly changing. --Mandon (talk) 19:59, February 14, 2016 (UTC)

His infobox should have his hat. I can live with his portrait omitting the hat, but it's such an iconic element to Sabo's character that he kind of needs it. We'd never let Luffy's infobox without his hat. 21:30, February 14, 2016 (UTC)

The current image shows him wearing his iconic pole in full, most of his iconic scar, his whole 2 eyes and is fullbody. So im in favour of keeping the current image. --Sarutobii2 (talk) 01:08, February 15, 2016 (UTC)

The scar isn't as iconic and the hat and shouldn't take priority. It still baffles me that some people think it should. Why does the pipe need to be fully shown in the infobox? What does it add? And anyways, to keep in line with the logic others have presented here - there are already images of him with full body in the gallery. --Mandon (talk) 03:11, February 15, 2016 (UTC)