I just need to know if the bounty on this page is indeed correct or made up. (Have not seen the Copper Movie). --One-Winged Hawk 19:28, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
Here.Mugiwara Franky 02:40, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
JUMP Super Anime Tour: One Piece - ROMANCE DAWN
It looks AWESOME! Especially since Brook's going to be in it, and Franky too, and all the other Straw Hats! - BattleFranky202 04:32, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
Umm, his name is spelled Gally in the Romance Dawn Story, not Galley. As such, I changed the reasoning that said "the other one was spelled Gally, and this is spelled Galley, so that signifies they are different people". It was spelled Gally on his wanted poster, so should there be a name change (at least to the in article spellings)? Nightmare Pirates (talk) 08:28, August 26, 2018 (UTC)
| Hey! Let's talk this out!
This is an active talk page. Please participate if you wish to make changes to the subject at hand. Remember to remain calm and civil throughout the discussion!
- Names: It seems that "different names" was used as evidence in the past, but the spelling Gally is used for both. There is no reason to have this article under a different name.
- Bounties: Currently the only argument is "different bounties". However, bounties can easily change and both bounties are non-canon.
Same name, same epithet, same basic design. The anime appearance at the end of WCI arc even uses the color scheme from the previous anime cameo instead of the Romance Dawn Story version. These should be merged under single article titled Gally, which would cover every adaptation of the character. Awaikage Talk 13:15, October 12, 2019 (UTC)
The name doesn't matter. They are different characters because they appeared in different things. One being filler and the other appearing in a prototype from Oda. Especially because they both have different histories. SeaTerror (talk) 17:38, October 12, 2019 (UTC)
It seems to me that Gally is just a reference to Galley from to one shot, and giving the fact Galley was partly canonize at the end of WCI, I think they should stay separated. Rhavkin (talk) 18:54, October 12, 2019 (UTC)
I think they should stay separated but there's no sense in keeping them under two different names while they're both called ギャリー (Gyarī, romanized as "Gally" on wanted posters). Cdwp22 (talk) 19:23, October 12, 2019 (UTC)
So every time a character appears in filler it's actually a different character? So we need "Foxy (Filler)" because he's appeared in non-canon naterial and an article for one-shot versions of Luffy etc.? Doesn't make any sense. The filler appearance is the same kind of cameo as Gally's appearance at Baratie, which is covered on the same article as the prototype Gally. Awaikage Talk 19:56, October 12, 2019 (UTC)
It definitely is. "Crescent-Moon Gally". In fact the anime used the same color scheme for Gally's canon apperance as they did for the filler cameo (Image), rather than the one they used in the adaptation of Romance Dawn. Anime having multiple designs for a character is nothing new and has never resulted in separate articles. Awaikage Talk 20:28, October 12, 2019 (UTC)
So it's the same character because the anime colored both the same way, and it is also the guy from the one one shot despite the anime colored them differently? Rhavkin (talk) 20:52, October 12, 2019 (UTC)
It's the same character because it's Crescent-Moon Gally. I just explained why design differences don't warrant a separate article or prove it's somehow a different character. But if we're arguing designs the split would be "Romance Dawn Story Gally" vs. the rest, since that one sticks out the most. Of course no articles based on anime design/color differences make any sense, which is why everything should be under one article in this instance as well. Awaikage Talk 21:07, October 12, 2019 (UTC)
We have separate pages for characters with the same name, the same epithet, or both (Mr. 7\Mr. 7 (Previous)). We keep going back to the points you claimed in the beginning do not matter, but apparently they are. Rhavkin (talk) 21:29, October 12, 2019 (UTC)
If a character appears in filler we do not assume it's actually a different character who just happens to have the exact the same name. The existence of two "Mr. 7"s has been established within the series. Awaikage Talk 21:37, October 12, 2019 (UTC)
But this isn't a "character appears in filler" case, this is a "filler character appears in story". And the Mr. 7s were an example of two separate pages of two separate characters with same known identity, not different canon status. 21:49, October 12, 2019 (UTC)
I think they should be merged. Them both being called "Crescent-Moon Galley" is pretty obvious. There are minor differences in appearance, but Gally from 2000 is clearly modeled after the Romance Dawn manga. Not to mention that Galley/Gally's other appearances are in 2008 and 2019, so they are obviously going to look slightly different. Minatomo (East Blue) doesn't have a separate page for his filler appearances, I don't really think Gally/Galley is much different. Kaido King of the Beasts (talk) 23:56, October 12, 2019 (UTC)
If they are merged though, which design would be used as infobox, since there's such a stark contrast between Loguetown Galley and Romance Dawn Galley.--Nightmare Pirates (talk) 00:17, October 13, 2019 (UTC)
Like every character who has appered in non-canon material... There's already multiple incarnations of Gally covered on this article: the canon Gally, the prototype Gally and the OVA retelling Gally. All have different histories.
What do you mean different histories? Galley did not appear in Loguetown in the manga. Him appearing in Loguetown filler does not contradict him being in Romance Dawn (also non-canon) or in WCI. Otherwise we should make separate pages for Heppoko, Peppoko, and Poppoko by that logic. Kaido King of the Beasts (talk) 18:35, October 13, 2019 (UTC)
But right now this article covers his appearance in the Romance Dawn universe and his appearance in the One Piece universe (manga & anime) at the end of Whole Cake Island. By your logic there's already contradiction. Awaikage Talk 18:51, October 13, 2019 (UTC)
They should be merged. We didn't have this problem with Ryuma when he reappeared during TB. We can make a non-canon disclaimer in the history section if need be but I see no issue in merging them.19:35, October 13, 2019 (UTC)
Let's say Ann (Romance Dawn) appeared in anime filler. Identical in name, and appearance. Would we consider that appearance as a separate character because "Oda hadn't created One Piece" when he created Ann? It doesn't make much sense, much like the Galley situation. Kaido King of the Beasts (talk) 21:06, October 13, 2019 (UTC)
DP, Ryuma was confirmed to be the same character.
Kaido, when the one shot was out, we had a page for the character. When the Loguetown episode aired, we said "Different in every way other then epithet, but obvious reference to the OS". When the anime adaptation aired we said "Anime adaptation mean its the same as OS". When the canon chapter was released, we assumed it was OS\AA, and it was confirmed in SBS 91 p. 918.
The Loguetown Gally is elderly, while the Baratie Galley is younger.22:11, October 13, 2019 (UTC)
Koushirou had graying hair in anime filler, does that make him a different character? It's just design differences, which happens with the anime all the time. Gally looks different in Romance Dawn Story compared to Baratie as well.
Rhavkin, your argument seems to come down to "because the wiki did it like this, it must be so". That's not really logical reasoning, since the wiki evolves all the time based on new information. Instead of looking at the situation in light of the new circumstances, you're constraining the argument with an old interpretation made under different circumstances. The current situation with Gally simply doesn't make sense. The anime can and does use characters created by Oda. Episodes of the anime and Movie 9 introduction feature wanted posters from many of his one-shot characters: Wild Joe, Spiel, D.R, Hitokui, Gally... These are not new characters. Awaikage Talk 10:00, October 14, 2019 (UTC)
Having read all the points brought up, I now agree with a merge. As the person who wrote most of the content for this page 6 years ago, I think it needs to be re-written/restructured. 10:18, October 14, 2019 (UTC)
Awaikage, I'm sorry if I was misunderstood. I am 100% don't say that the reason for the keep is because it is this way now, let me try and make my point clear:
It is obvious, to me, that the Galley from the one shot and the Galley from the special, are the same, and it was confirmed by Oda that the Galley from Baratie is the same as well. The Galley from Loguetown is not confirmed to be the same, and since the wiki decided to keep it different in the past, and no new information is given, the point Kaido made about an establish character appearing is different from this case.
If the design difference is okay, what's to say other non canon character that share a name\epithet are different from canon characters? And bounties can increase, but you're assuming a time line, in which "Galley" arrived to Loguetown, got captured, escaped, got a bounty increase, terrorize a village (on the grand line based on the anime), was defeated by Luffy, and went back to East Blue for a meal. Rhavkin (talk) 12:22, October 14, 2019 (UTC)
That wouldn't be the case with the timeline because everything up until his post-timeskip appearance is non-canon. The one-shot appearances could be relegated to an Early One Piece section. The appearance in Loguetown would just be relegated to non-canon sections, same with the OVA appearance. 12:33, October 14, 2019 (UTC)
As Noland said, non-canon material doesn't adhere to a logical timeline. There isn't any way to justify how all the characters in Stampede could logically be present, but it doesn't matter because the movie isn't canon. Non-canon can contradict both canon material and other non-canon material. Awaikage Talk 13:05, October 14, 2019 (UTC)
So now you're hitting a reset button and disregarding the discussion up to this point? I assumed good faith with your previous comment but now it feels like you're deliberately being inattentive. Gally is a canon character with non-canon apperances, Loguetown being one of them and Romance Dawn Story another. Personality? I do not think a 30-second cameo is enough to witness the full extent of Gally's personality, and the little we did see does not seem any way indicative of it being a different character. The designs have differences across all of his apperances, but all have the same basic look. The name, the epithet, the fact that he's a pirate captain, the fact that he has the same Jolly Roger... Same character. Awaikage Talk 20:49, October 14, 2019 (UTC)
No reset button, just summing up that after all of this discussion, neither side has given any clear justification for any change. Loguetown Gally is clearly inspired by Galley, but there is still nothing to say they are the same character, while WCI Galley is confirmed to be the same. Again, we have multiple characters that share a name, and some characters that share an epithet, we have similar jolly rogers, and many pirate captains. Yes. this is the first time we have all of those with the same two characters, but there are as many differences as there are similarities, including bounty, appearance. personality, crew, region, history and most importantly, canoninity. Rhavkin (talk) 21:03, October 14, 2019 (UTC)
I feel the inclusion of invalidated points on the list of arguments is akin to resetting. What seems to be happening is that you're basing most of your argument on the current state of the wiki articles rather than the actual material. That simply doesn't work, it's a fallacy and misses the whole point of a merge.
The two articles differ in history (sections) and canonicity, because of the underlying assumption that they are different characters. If they are the same character, there is no issue. Let's say I create an article for Katakuri in the anime filler scene where he walks to the castle, deciding that it's a different character. Okay, the character is non-canon and the history consists of him walking to the castle. So when someone says that it's actually the same character as Katakuri, I'll say: No, because this other Katakuri has different history and canonicity. I think you get the point even with this silly example.
You could put the Romance Dawn Story (OVA) appearance under the same scrutiny if that had a separate article. Gally in Romance Dawn Story looks different, he's in a different region and the article would have different history and canonicity compared to the WCI apperance. Why is this not an issue? Because it's still Gally. Gally the character doesn't have two contradictory states of canonicity. He is canon, but featured in some non-canon material. Awaikage Talk 13:28, October 15, 2019 (UTC)
I'm sorry you feel this way, this wasn't my intention. I'm obviously in the minority here, the only one taking the time to explain this position, and I am tired. so do whatever you want. Rhavkin (talk) 20:11, October 15, 2019 (UTC)