Talk:Henna Oyag

Canon or Non-Canon
Please discuss.Mugiwara Franky 13:33, September 21, 2010 (UTC)

He's canon because he was in a one shot. Original source is always canon. SeaTerror 05:55, October 8, 2010 (UTC)


 * "I'll keep it simple, the Non-Canon Characters category is used for characters not canonical to One Piece. It is irrelevant if he is from Wanted because the proper use of this tag concerns only the One Piece World regardless if Wanted is a oneshot manga from Oda! Since his only appearances have been in the anime but not in the manga it is justifiable that he belongs there. Unless he appears in the One Piece manga you shouldn't remove it." MasterDeva 00:22, September 14, 2010 (UTC)


 * By your logic Movies are canon to their media (anime) and guess what, fillers too. It has never appeared in the manga which is the real canon and Wanted has nothing to do about the world of One Piece, period! The only appearance the wanted poster has ever made was in original content only in the anime. It's got nothing to do with it, why are you always that stubborn refusing to admit your mistakes... you've already shown that you're not perfect and you do make mistakes like each one of us. MasterDeva 08:45, October 8, 2010 (UTC)

No this category is for One Piece ONLY. So only One Piece characters should appear in it. He does not belong there because he is canon to Wanted. If something is in an original source that makes them canon. If they appear in a different medium then they are not canon to that medium but they are still canon to their original source. SeaTerror 16:06, October 8, 2010 (UTC)


 * "...Also you never responded back on the Henna Oyaji talk page. SeaTerror 19:09, October 12, 2010 (UTC)"


 * I've said already what I had to say. This isn't going anywhere anymore, in fact it's going around in circles! Wanted has nothing to do with One Piece so it's NOT canon. Apparently you never intended to at least think it over again... I don't know why you expect a "response" when yourself haven't said anything new on the matter that isn't even worthy of one. MasterDeva 05:22, October 13, 2010 (UTC)

It is canon because its an original source. It really is quite simple. Original source ALWAYS = CANON. SeaTerror 18:00, October 13, 2010 (UTC)


 * Gonna have to say that this discussion is really asking for the definition of what Canon means in the context of the wikia.


 * If Canon is being referred to the One Piece Manga, then characters like Henna Oyaji aren't canon. With the exception of Monsters, the various different one shots separate from One Piece created by Oda are pretty much different manga. They were created as different prototypes manga ideas Oda wanted to try out. They were not exactly all made in lieu of One Piece. I mean they pretty much exist in different manga universes separate from the One Piece based on their context. Wanted takes place in a Western setting which has a wondering spirit haunting the guy that killed him. God's Gift for the Future takes place in a modern Tokyo-like city and has elements similar to Death Note. Ikki Yako takes place in a setting that I guess is similar to Inuyasha what with the demon.


 * Those one shots all have elements that make them Non-Canon to the One Piece manga storyline. True, despite their different elements Oda could tie some them to the main One Piece storyline like what he did with Monsters by including Ryuuma. However, until then, they really should be treated as separate from the One Piece manga storyline.


 * If Canon is being referred as being created by Oda, the "original source", then that's where things kinda get more difficult. There are stuff like Wapol's brother and Don Achino that were created by Oda but were definitely not Canon to the One Piece manga storyline.Mugiwara Franky 19:07, October 13, 2010 (UTC)

Original source as in the one shots. The Ice Hunter arc is filler but the characters are technically canon. The one shots are not canon to One Piece but they are canon to their own works. SeaTerror 20:51, October 13, 2010 (UTC)


 * Yes indeed, the characters from the one shots are canon to the one shots. However, canon in the wikia is generally associated by most as referring to One Piece. If they have no connection to One Piece other than being drawn by Oda, then they are technically Non-canon. The one shots are like Rave and Fairy Tail for example. Both are drawn by the same author and are canon in their respective mangas, however they are not canon in the other's story.Mugiwara Franky 00:44, October 14, 2010 (UTC)

It doesn't matter if they are not canon to a different story. They are still canon because ANY original source is canon. SeaTerror 01:45, October 14, 2010 (UTC)


 * Yes we have more than established that they are Canon to their story. Henna Oyaji is canon to Wanted and so on. You keep saying that. However, whether they are canon to their respective stories is not the issue. The issue is whether they are canon to One Piece. You keep saying that they are Non-Canon to One Piece. The Non-Canon category is generally accepted by most as Non-Canon to the One Piece, specifically the One Piece manga. With those points established, since the one shots are not canon to One Piece, very evident in the manga, then they should be categorized as Non-Canon. However, despite the clear line, you insist that they should not be categorized Non-Canon even though the Non-Canon category refers to whatever's listed in it as being Non-Canon to the One Piece manga.


 * Considering the pattern of responses you've given in this discussion and in similar ones, I believe that your response to this one would be "It doesn't matter" or whatever repeated argument. Well, just to tell you in advance, it does matter. It matters because it is common sense. You cannot use the argument "The one shots are Canon in their own stories" when the discussion is about "Whether the one shots should be belong in a category that is Non-Canon to One Piece". Seriously, I can see why MasterDeva didn't want to respond back to you here. You aren't putting 2 and 2 together here.Mugiwara Franky 08:55, October 14, 2010 (UTC)

Nothing should be categorized as non-canon when they are not. That is the entire point of this. Also did the original creator of the template and non-canon articles claim that "the Non-Canon category refers to whatever's listed in it as being Non-Canon to the One Piece manga."?

Also if that was true then why was the Dragon Ball article never tagged as non-canon? SeaTerror 04:19, October 15, 2010 (UTC)


 * Yes nothing should be categorized as non-canon when they are not, but canonnity in general is not the point. The point is whether the subject is canon to One Piece. You keep defending that it should not be categorized as Non-Canon without addressing what the Non-Canon category refers to. The Non-Canon category is generally viewed as being Non-Canon to the One Piece manga without saying by simply fact that it lists stuff that are non manga related. It, fortunately for some people, has a saying if you even bothered to look closer at the categories. The main category says so.


 * From day one, its been used for Non-Canon stuff that is not found in the One Piece manga like anime characters. People have gotten . Its only relatively recently that its starting to include Non-One Piece stuff as people are seeing that they fall in the same jurisdiction as the other Non-Canon stuff. No actual discussion about including them was made, but based on how most people see the category, none was deemed necessary in the first place. Based on how things went, most people had more or less an unspoken understanding that Wanted and the other unrelated One-Shots fall also in the Non-Canon category.


 * As for Dragon Ball, it not being categorized as Non-Canon is just a slight oversight. People haven't gotten to the page yet and thought about adding the Non-Canon category to it. However based on how things are going in this discussion, whether it started in Dragonball or here, its clear the same argument was going to be made.Mugiwara Franky 08:49, October 15, 2010 (UTC)

Actually the non canon template does not say that. Let me bold it for you. "This is the directory for anything which appears in a One Piece related media that was not written by Oda. This contains characters and Arcs from the anime, video games and movies alike.

1) The one shots were written by Oda

2) Nowhere does it say One Shots

They were never originally used for it because it is correct. It does not matter if they are non-canon to One Piece because original source always means canon. It would be incorrect to label them as non-canon. SeaTerror 21:37, October 15, 2010 (UTC)


 * You are seriously avoiding the issue of what Non-Canon refers to in this wikia. I already explained why people see why they should be labeled as Non-Canon. The Non-Canon category is generally understood by people as referring as Non-Canon to the One Piece story. Categorizing a page as Non-Canon does not mean it is not canon in its own story. It means that it is non-canon to One Piece. People interpret it that way. Why because it appears in every single anime and game article. It is only naturally that people with common sense would understand that it means that Non-Canon to the One Piece manga storyline as


 * You keep arguing that they should not be categorized as Non-Canon as they are canon to their original source. Everybody gets that. You however have not been arguing of what Non-Canon means in the context of the wikia. The wikia is about One Piece. It follows that a category named Non-Canon would mean Non-Canon to One Piece. If it were a wikia about different manga series. Then a category named Non-Canon would mean Non-Canon to the varying manga contained within in it.


 * You keep saying that certain stuff does not matter in the argument. You keep saying that and keep saying pretty much nothing new in your defense. Well, just stop that because they do matter. It matters that the One Shots are Non-Canon to One Piece because everybody who sees such a category name in such a One Piece wikia will naturally associate it as meaning Non-Canon to One Piece. It's common and natural sense.


 * If you want to make a big halabaloo arguing whether Non-Canon in this wikia should mean Non-Canon in general rather than naturally associated as Non-Canon to One Piece, be my guess. You've pretty much wasted the people's time arguing over a character that doesn't even appear in the flesh but just on a Wanted Poster in a manga that nothing more than an experiment. So why not, go ahead and make the problem bigger. However, if you want to continue to insist that this character and the other Non One Piece stuff are canon based on the grounds that they are canon to their own separate stories without addressing the bigger problem, then just stop. This whole argument is just gonna go around in circles unless the bigger issue is addressed.Mugiwara Franky 10:23, October 16, 2010 (UTC)

Lock
Really had to put a serious lock and reverted it to the last known version that wasn't about the edit war.Mugiwara Franky 09:17, October 15, 2010 (UTC)