Talk:Laffitte

Mustache Man

Isn't Laffite the guy in the third pannel?--Thenewjericho 23:20, 30 July 2009 (UTC) http://www.onemanga.com/One_Piece/552/12/

The mustached guy is next to the Fishman Whitebeard Pirate with the Crimin brand shirt. HereMugiwara Franky 23:37, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

No because if you look in another panel in present time (not in the flashback) in that chapter it shows the mustache guy again with marco.

Soru?

In the episode where Ace confronts Blackbeard (325?), just after Blackbeard gets set on fire, his crew rush to help him. However when Lafitte appears, it makes that 'psshew' sound effect that the CP9 and Luffy make when they use Soru. I know this has no manga basis, but could it be a hint that Lafitte can use Soru, or has that 'soru sound effect' been used when anyone else uses regular 'super human speed'.94.6.202.244 11:35, September 13, 2009 (UTC)

In the scenes wherein Oars dodges the Straw Hats' attacks, I believe the same sound was also applied. In any case, its just a sound effect of fast movement used in Lafitte's case.Mugiwara Franky 11:57, September 13, 2009 (UTC)

It wouldn't count anyway since it isn't canon. It wouldn't even be worth a mention. Drunk Samurai 19:23, September 13, 2009 (UTC)

Clockwork orange ?

At the very first time i saw Laffite, it immediately reminds me the movie Clockwork orange.

-he looks like Alex (clothes, cane probably with a sword)

-in the scenario, Alex is known for its violence. And at the end of the film, his friends ("droogs") become policemen

-the movie speaks about freedom, Laffite's wings can be symbolic

I join a picture: http://www.okinart.net/audioblog/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/a_clockwork_orange.jpg

Lafitte's wings

Pic of his arms being turned into wings found here. Just in case, due to the poor anime depiction.Mugiwara Franky 12:58, July 8, 2010 (UTC)

Just out of curiosity...I was looking around and i read about Shiki's Island/Base or whatever, Merveille, and it says "...it also contains people who have feathers on their arms that enable flight...", as soon as I saw that I was curious as to see what other people might think?. Whoayeah, 12:08, November 14th, 2010 (UTC)

About this revert: even if it is highly unlikely that it not be a devil fruit, it is still only an assumption. I find it important to distinguish between what is confirmed and what is not. Plus, was the revert necessary? Is it such a serious issue to have a fact that you consider "obviously true" pointed out only as "most likely"? Sff9 22:31, January 10, 2011 (UTC)

Read [1], [2], and [3] Though the last one is only minor related. SeaTerror 03:20, January 11, 2011 (UTC)

Not sure what's your point here. You wanna show that there are debates concerning potential devil fruits, but not about Laffitte's? That's no proof...

Anyhow, even if there is yet no other possible explanation in the manga for these wings, we can't presume that Oda showed us everything. The source that is mentioned only proves that Laffitte can change his arms into wings; my wording gives as much information as the previous one, but leaves the final decision to the reader. I think it's more honest and worthy of an encyclopedia. Sff9 (talk) 13:30, January 11, 2011 (UTC)

And then I thought it was just me who missed the official line about his "df", agree with Sff9 Jinbe 13:57, January 11, 2011 (UTC)

The point is you would have to remove that entire section along with making various edits to other Devil Fruit pages. SeaTerror 16:13, January 11, 2011 (UTC)

I somehow fail to get the argument... so you agree that everything stated is speculation, but removing it is to troublesome because other "devil fruits" would have to be changed as well? Which ones? It just doesn't sit well with me, especially because we know so little about Lafitte. Jinbe 16:42, January 11, 2011 (UTC)

If the only problem is that there is work to do in order to make everything consistent, I can take care of that. The fact that Jinbe was somewhat fooled into believing this was confirmed, illustrates exactly my point. Sff9 (talk) 16:56, January 11, 2011 (UTC)

I think you have misinterpreted what Jinbe meant. It was more something like "I thought I was the only one that it didn't sit well in the stomach with" or among those lines. To get back to the point of the discussion though, the use of phrases like "most likely" shouldn't be used in an encyclopedia because they point to speculation and thus should be avoided. That should be reason enough to revert your edit. As for Laffitte having a Devil Fruit, that much is certain. The ability to sprout wings from his body is something that a Devil Fruit grants. It also explains how he was able to reach that high window from Mariejois too. MasterDeva 18:30, January 11, 2011 (UTC)

Removing the "most likely" does not make a fact from a speculation. Actually this is worse.

In an encyclopedia, when there is a fact that is unsure but considered likely by a vast majority of people, it is not forbidden to state it!

This wiki is about an ongoing series, there are many certainties that will turn out to be wrong. Such an encyclopedia should present the current state of knowledge, admitting when things are unsure, rather than pretending to be sure just to look serious. Doing so seems really superficial and unencyclopedic to me (exactly like choosing between "he" and "she" in Haruta's page, because "using neutral looks weird"... Duh.).

I try to put myself in the place of a random user: will s/he verify the sources? No, s/he will take it as a fact, and then on forums go like "that's confirmed, I saw it on the Wikia". And that's how myths start, that are so hard to fight.

All this screed was to be taken at a general sense of course. I don't think that in the case of Laffitte this could create such problems. Still, a real source for "Laffitte has a devil fruit" would be a manga or databook sentence stating this fact; whereas for now, the source only states that he can change his arms into wings. The encyclopedia thus (1) makes a deduction, which is worse than using "most likely", and (2) hides this deduction to the reader, which is even worse, and also risky. Sff9 (talk) 19:14, January 11, 2011 (UTC)

What you're using as an example is different from I've said. First things first, using phrases the type of "most likely" are a no no in this wikia, that much is a rule and it has nothing to with hiding anything from the reader. Moving on to your example, you took a little piece from Haruta's talk which was no more than a mere statement to make it into an example. It was mentioned only once wasn't expanded upon by the rest of the participants in the discussion!

Although I get what you were trying to say using a better suited example would have been more appropriate. Of course it's not forbidden to state something here that is widely believed by a vast majority of people, like Shanks using Haki on the Lord of the Coast to save Luffy, as an other example! Also, it was later proven to be true. Being a site (wikia) that everyone can contribute to articles to add, remove or rewrite content is both the strength and weakness of it.

Though its capacity to evolve is limitless the chance that false content will find its way here is high too. We can't prevent the average Joe from writing "I read that in the wikia so it's confirmed" because that very person won't bother to check the sources (if any) or the correctness of the translation that are being used. What's I'm trying to say is that it is their responsibility to process information they take in, that is common sense but not so "common" everyone. Similarly an editor should also check data to the best of his (neutral) ability before making an article change. I understand that you comprehend that too from what I gather.

If Laffitte isn't a Devil Fruit user it will eventually be removed as that is the case with everything that's proven wrong. To be honest there are more other issues to be dealt that fall under speculation, than Laffitte's wings being a result of an "ability" or not. Nevertheless thanks for mentioning it. MasterDeva 20:57, January 11, 2011 (UTC)

I'm a bit shocked that things like this are considered acceptable. I thought this wiki is all about accurate information and not about building chart houses made of speculations and vague conclusions. Thats the reason why I said "glad Im not the only one to notice that", because I really thought I missed a manga chapter or an anime dialog. I couldn't believe that a whole section of a more or less prominent character is partially made up (and now defended).

And even if you consider this a non-issue, you kinda open pandoras box by letting it slip through the radar. After reading your comment, what stops me (and others) from adding more speculation to other articles? I mean hey, even if my statements are just vague conclusions, time will tell if they are wrong or not!

Somehow i don't understand that logic... it is o.k. to state unconfirmed conclusions as facts, but it is a no no to use "likely"?(to at least imply that the statement isn't confirmed, but well... more then likely?)

Jinbe 22:11, January 11, 2011 (UTC)

I believe I referred to "most likely" when I mentioned that so please quote accordingly. ;P Well joking aside, when something is added to an article and editors don't feel agreeable with it being there, discussions like this one happen. If people agree through a voting process or otherwise that it stays it will, if not it gets removed. That's usually how situations like these are dealt with.

Another thing is that while you mentioned that the issue has slipped through the radar it is not true. It has been noted and discussed in the talk page so that people know about it which is the gist of it. Having something "under the radar" means that an editor has suddenly found a piece of info that is wrong, has been there for some time (even months in certain cases) and no one had noticed or mentioned it before.

I hope that I've managed to answer your questions without confusion, if you need to ask anything else please feel free to do so. MasterDeva 23:00, January 11, 2011 (UTC)

Well, it has not slipped through the radar -yet- because we discuss it, but it could very well happen (especially if obvious speculation is accepted by a long term member, aka you). So if you could answer that question for me: Is speculation wanted, yes or no? It is confusing, because on the one hand you tell me that the phrase "most likely" is an unwanted no no, but on the other you allow vague conclusions to stay? (without reference, it is)

I know and agree that communication is a must in order to work together on a wiki, but what is the aim of the whole thing? There are blogs and forum posts for speculation, why can't we keep the articles -fact only-? To be honest this whole discussion surprises me, i just jumped in to make sure i did not missed a chapter (because this is the first article that contains heavy speculation, stated as a fact) and now i find myself in a debate on principles.Jinbe 23:27, January 11, 2011 (UTC)

I'm glad to see that I totally agree with Jinbe. @MasterDeva: thanks for taking your time to answer so thoroughly and politely. Nevertheless, you still haven't convinced me! I'll just reply to a few points.

• Haruta wasn't indeed a good example, but it's something I saw here and there that I found surprising: "we don't know yet, but let's decide it's this way, when it's confirmed we'll change, no big deal". I know it's not your opinion, but your last paragraph slightly heads this way.

• The problem here is not about having to correct what unpredictably turned out to be true or false. It's about pretending to have a source whereas it is not the case.

• You say "Of course it's not forbidden to state something here that is widely believed by a vast majority of people" but it's exactly what I find bad: doing so without clearly stating that it's speculation.

Actually the only problem for me is this forbidden usage of "most likely". It is neutral and allows to clearly differentiate what's confirmed and what's... most likely. It does not make the wiki look less like an encyclopedia! I don't understand why you think so! Sff9 (talk) 23:26, January 11, 2011 (UTC)

I'll try to answer all those questions carefully, please tell me if I misunderstood something, missed it completely or wasn't easily comprehended.

If someone calls something vague by interpretation, speculation or misconception, it will be discussed in the talk page only and be addressed with other editors there. If it's something that's obviously speculation, funfiction for example, reverting to a previous revision and stating the reason as "speculation" should be enough. Statements that include the words "it is speculated", "it is unknown why" and generally phrases that lead to clear use of it should be avoided in the article pages. That's a rule.

Speculation isn't wanted but not everything without references is speculation. For example, the personality section of character articles. While some statements are interpretation that haven't been explicitly said in the manga they'll be used to describe the reason that lead a person act or feel some way. Separating speculation from common (or not so at that) reasoning is a fine line; that is usually not so clear to see and that is usually a common problem in places like a wiki. To speak specifically of this article now (Laffitte's wings) and leave aside the general idea, it is not heavy speculation by any means. In comparison with other events that have caused serious edit wars and discussions going around in a loop, it is nothing in comparison.

To "leave something that way" until more information is available at a later point of the story. It is something that editors will do to quickly resolve around issues when not much information is available to reach a clear conclusion. It is usually noted in the talk pages (or in some cases in a synopsis of a revision). People will be made aware of the issue so other editors won't begin to heavily edit it, changing it back and forth (an action that almost always leads to edit wars and headaches for those who will come to help) only to end up locking the page.

I will note here that it is usually discussed and agreed, that the article will stay in its present state, if multiple editors have conflicting opinions about the way it should be handled. Other times someone will just leave a note about it "staying that way" and if no one has a different opinion it most likely stay. It is important to mention that it is not improbable that people have missed it completely while being occupied by something else. Not responding doesn't always mean that they agree with the way the situation was handled!

I think I've covered everything important that was asked about. That's more or less the way we work in this wikia in a nutshell, I've tried to keep it as simple as possible and explain anything in layman's terms. ^_^ MasterDeva 00:42, January 12, 2011 (UTC)

You're very nice, MasterDeva. All right, you talked well, so my only real disagreement is now over your first paragraph, and this rule. It's about the philosophy of the wiki, no more relation with Laffitte than with any other character. Is it possible to discuss this rule? If so, where? sff9 (talk) 01:05, January 12, 2011 (UTC)

Unfortunately that very rule is the corner stone upon which the whole wiki was developed. It is the spirit of this site and one of the first rules that were written when it was created. It is not up for discussion, sorry about that. MasterDeva 01:44, January 12, 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your response.

Where can I read up on these written rules? I can only find the guidelines for images.

As for the comparison with the personality section, my problem is that in this very case, the "conclusions" are stated as flat-out-facts. I understand very well that some things (like character traits) demand interpretation to a certain degree, but they are usually backed up by phrases like "it seems that", or are stated together with a quote/reference. And this is done for the personality, a topic that will be unlikely explained directly in the series (unlike devil fruits).

And now we have Lafittes power. Yes, I believe as well that Laffitte ate a devil fruit. Maybe he used it to get on top of Mariejois, it would "make sense". Yes, it is likely that he is a paramecia or a zoan type (sprouting wings). But fact is: these are my (and others) conclusions/speculations for a fictional character in a fictional world, where the very foundations of the series are roughed up regularly (Blackbeard having 2 devil fruit powers, Logias being not untouchable anymore because of haki, new mythical zoans that have traits of logias etc).

So please tell me, because I still don't understand... why is it forbidden to use -in this case- words like "it seems, most likely, probably", because well... the assumptions are not fact, but reinforced by hints (at best)?

What do we gain by selling our assumptions as facts? Mistrust. What do we achieve if we admit it is just speculation? Credibility.Jinbe 08:50, January 12, 2011 (UTC)

A good place to start reading about our rules and policies would be our FAQ. You'll be able to navigate your way through there to find what you want to learn. I want to make clear, that I brought up the 'personality section' as an example earlier because from interpretation of your messages, what you perceived as speculation was vague. I have already explained the rule about speculation so there is no use to add anything further.

I think that the root of the problem you're trying to address is the way a reference was placed in the paragraph, that somehow states "conclusions as facts"; changing that directly from the beginning would have been a better approach. I'll reword it and move it to point out what's known as fact, so it doesn't cause confusion to you any more or anyone else for that matter. MasterDeva 12:09, January 12, 2011 (UTC)

Not really, the problem is that the article states his abilities come from a devil fruit, while nothing is stated. A similar case has been discussed for Doflamingo and Dragon, both characters that seem to have devil fruit-like powers, but without any CLEAR confirmation.

This is from Doflamingos talkpage, under "powers", from Mugiwara Franky:

"The thing with the other characters is that they have Devil Fruit powers is clear. A man that acts like a castle with little people inside is clearly a Devil Fruit user. They are also some who have been clearly stated by characters to be Devil Fruit users without their Devil Fruit's name being shown

With Doflamingo, its hard to tell if what he's doing is Devil Fruit based or not. He could be using a form of Devil Fruit power that grants puppetry, or he could be using extremely thin strings stored in his coat. It's just not clear.Mugiwara Franky 06:54, 23 August 2009 (UTC)"

In the case of Lafitte, he could have paper wings stored in his sleeves. It's just not clear.

Wouldn't it be a compromise to state the "devil fruitish" things we know in the "miscellaneous" page instead of calling it a devil fruit yet? There is so much talk about the holy "consistency" on the wiki, so why don't we handle it like with doflamingo and dragon?

Nothing is lost, I don't want the information there removed, just similar handled. Wouldn't that be a compromise we can live with? Jinbe 12:49, January 12, 2011 (UTC)

You are beginning to move away from the center of this discussion and use uneven examples. While Doflamingo having a Devil Fruit or not would be pure speculation (the same can be said about Dragon), it's not the same with this situation! Laffitte shows us a visual representation of a trait found in Zoan Devil Fruit users and that share in common and that is the transformation of body parts, furthermore you'll notice that his wings don't come out of his sleeves.

To say it differently, Laffitte clearly displays an optical difference that alludes to a Devil Fruit, be it Zoan or Paramecia. The aforementioned characters do not! I don't see how using sarcasm about the consistency in this wiki serves to make a point. We are trying to be consistent with things but the truth is that you will find a great number of examples showing otherwise. Furthermore Laffitte's "Devil Fruit" doesn't have its own page (Laffitte's Devil Fruit, for example) so it hasn't been taken to the extreme like you say it is.

You're making a bigger deal out of this than you should and to quote Mugiwara Franky like you did, "when there are more than enough signs for a fact to be confirmed, then it must be true whether or not there is a direct confirmation" and leave it at that until more information becomes available for us to use. MasterDeva 14:08, January 12, 2011 (UTC)

It is sad that you now try to blame me using sarcasm (I dont), while I just gave you an example of why I think the way I do. Mugiwaras quote and Doflamingos/Dragons page are one of the reasons why I don't understand the current state of Lafittes ability section - and I thought I will let you know (so you can comprehend the root of my problem, which you try to take out of my mouth from the very beginning, even telling Sff9 how to understand my first comment).

And now you tell me I'm making a bigger deal of this then I should, basically politely implying to shut up. The smallest translation issues are discussed here daily, the most trivial things like color schemes need attention. But I'm not allowed to discuss a whole aspect of a character article?

So anyway, we have a situation where more then 2 editors have different opinions, can we start a vote then? Because obviously we can't find a middleway. Jinbe 15:12, January 12, 2011 (UTC)

It appears that several misunderstanding have happened even though I tried to avoid it. First, I never intended to blame you of anything nor to "shut up" for any reason, please understand that! Second, you've used the phrase 'holy "consistency"', what else did you expect me to understand from it? You're either using sarcasm or talking lightly of it, I apologise for the confusion or bad feelings I've caused and it was not intentional on my part. You're free to discuss about things to change in an article page (no one said you shouldn't) but discussions must also lead to a solution and not go around in circles or in a loop! I just made a statement for a possible solution, I didn't lock the talk page to prevent you from writing. You're making a bigger deal out of what I said. It was just that.

I thought that what Sff9 said "Jinbe was somewhat fooled into believing this was confirmed" was in response to "It just doesn't sit well with me, especially because we know so little about Lafitte" you've made above and not the 'I thought it was just me who missed the official line about his "df"' statement you've made earlier. You should have noted that earlier in the conversation though (unless you've noticed it just now), when I said to "tell me if I misunderstood something, missed it completely or wasn't easily comprehended" it was referred to both of you because I started to feel tired and could make mistakes!

I am aware that you tried to use those two examples to explain your thought process but as I have already explained, they are not the same. You're comparing apples and oranges, while they may look the same they're not. This is not a mistranslation to cause separate interpretation by different individuals by a flaw in the text! That's what I was trying to explain. MasterDeva 16:00, January 12, 2011 (UTC)

As for me, as long as it is clear when reading the article that there exists no source stating "Laffitte has eaten a devil fruit", I have no reason to debate here. If I understood well, you're gonna try to reword it, MasterDeva. I'll wait for this rewording, or maybe give it a try myself. More generally speaking, I agree with Jinbe, but I guess if the discussion has to go on, we should move it to One_Piece_Encyclopedia_talk:Speculations, that seems exactly the place where to talk about such things. sff9 (talk) 16:30, January 12, 2011 (UTC)

I have already moved and reworded the reference to say that "Laffitte is shown flying with his hands transformed to wings" instead of mentioning "Laffitte displays his Devil Fruit powers" like before so the source is more literal. I'm afraid that the talk page you've mentioned, Sff9, is only for the specific article and not for the usage that you suggested. If you have any thoughts or suggestions that you haven't said or talked about yet you're welcome to express them. MasterDeva 16:59, January 12, 2011 (UTC)

Okay, maybe we really got things messed up during that conversation, after all it is not easy to interact without gesture, mimic and tone. But that for sure, I did not try to mock you with sarcasm (or any other way).

So, maybe I try it again, without a lot of text to interpret.

What do you think of just adding one word to the article:

Laffitte seems to possess an as-of-yet unnamed Devil Fruit that allows him to transform his arms into wings and fly. At this point, any limitations to this fruit's powers, and whether it is a Paramecia or Zoan type fruit, are unknown. It doesn't seem to have any weaknesses aside from the standard Devil Fruit weaknesses.

It implies that (while all hints lead to a devil fruit user), nothing is confirmed and set in stone. And because of the pictures and references it isn't pure speculation. Jinbe16:32, January 12, 2011 (UTC)

That would a fine solution. If I may add, you can use either seems or appears. I'm more in favor of the second because that's what we commonly put every time we handle these situations, usually in conjunction with an image related to their Devil Fruit power. I believe I don't have anything more to add, I hope this is something that everyone agrees to. MasterDeva 16:59, January 12, 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, appears is a nice choice, especially because seems would be redundant (seems is present in the last sentence)

Nice, so we just have to wait for sff9 and the topic is solved till we get more information :)Jinbe 17:06, January 12, 2011 (UTC)

Fine by me. Now in my original edit, I also reworded the end of the paragraph, as it sounded weird to me to read "it does not seem to have any weaknesses" whereas we know strictly nothing about the fruit: I think that precisely, in that case, "does not seem" is used to speculate.

Mixing the propositions this could give:

Laffitte appears to possess a [[Devil Fruit]] that allows him to transform his arms into wings and fly{{qref|volume=56|chapter=542|Episode=444|text=Laffitte displays his wings outside the gates of Impel Down.}}. As yet, the fruit's name, type, limitations and weaknesses (aside from the standard Devil Fruit weaknesses) are unknown.

I would like to thank both of you for your politeness, patience and understanding. sff9 (talk) 17:30, January 12, 2011 (UTC)

That would be fine by me too. Lets wait a last time for MasterDeva to confirm or deny that, then we can close the case. Jinbe 17:44, January 12, 2011 (UTC)

People, asking for an opinion about an article change is always welcome but it doesn't have to be every step of the way. If something looks like it needs to be rephrased you can do it directly. If further changes are necessary some other user will do them later. ;) I'm saying this because it starts to feel like Knol all of a sudden and not like wikia, that "restrictiveness" so to speak makes me feel numb... You're good to go by the way, I don't any problem with either of two those edits. XD MasterDeva 05:28, January 13, 2011 (UTC)

Heh, of course. Just well...that discussion is several DIN4 pages long and I don't want to risk another ignition of the topic, especially when we found a solution for now. (to just go ahead and edit seems rude to me, especially in a ongoing debate) So it is just fair to wait for your response like we did for Sff9 . But good, case closed! XDJinbe 07:13, January 13, 2011 (UTC)

Chapter 595

In this chapter, Laffitte talks to Vasco Shot and say that if the latter wants to become the captain, Laffitte will kill him. I think that this means he has the ability to kill an Impel Down's level six prisoner. Shouldn't it be added on this page? --Meganoide 12:16, August 11, 2010 (UTC)

It's just a threat, not an actual show of power. It's pretty much similar to this hypothetical conversation between Luffy and Nami:

Luffy: Hey Nami, can I use some of our savings to buy meat :)?

Nami: Touch a single coin and I will kill you >:(.

It's just like that, however in the Blackbeard Pirates' it's a bit more serious.Mugiwara Franky 13:27, August 11, 2010 (UTC)

Well, you are right. Sorry. --Meganoide 14:28, August 11, 2010 (UTC)

Well, there's that, but I've seen two scanlations, and in one Laffitte tells Vasco Shot that he'll die (if he tries to become captain), and in the other, Laffitte explicitly says Blackbeard will kill him. I dunno what the original Japanese line was, but I don't think Laffitte was threatening to kill him personally. I do think he was serious though about Blackbeard killing Vasco Shot if it came to duking it out over the captaincy, hahaha. Raikia 20:56, August 11, 2010 (UTC)

Vasco Shot? You mean Avalo Pizarro, right? Anyway, it would seem that Laffitte said that out of Loyalty to Teach. I don't think it should be taken as Pizarro receiving a death threat, but rather him having a death wish. That way it would get the basic idea across without appearing partial to either translation.DancePowderer 21:09, August 11, 2010 (UTC)

You are completely right! I dind't remember who was the one who proposed to become captain, i thought it was Shot but actually it was Pizarro, I conrolled after asking my question. Are reading a second time the chapter I noticed that Laffitte's speech was really only a generical advertisement, not a personal menace. I'm really sorry for the problem I created. Please forgive me :-) --Meganoide 22:01, August 11, 2010 (UTC)

Shikozume?

Does Laffitte really possess a shikomizue? It wasn't clearly shown. Yatanogarasu 07:42, August 18, 2010 (UTC)

Cane-sword?!

WHO did an edit on the cane? A sword? Sorry, but are you out of your mind? Where did you get it from? He attacked Newgate with a SWORD that was left stuck in him after, a random katana and later used a pistol to threat marines.

unique laugh

I think Lafitte has a unique laugh, it goes ho-ho-ho-ho, just like Santa Claus stereotype. Please let me know your thoughts on this, because every time he laughed it went just like that.A Wikia Helper 21:46, February 7, 2011 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure Neptune has the same laugh, so I'm not sure how unique it is...DancePowderer 21:49, February 7, 2011 (UTC)

Well Neptunes laugh was hoh hoh hoh hoh, well Laffitte's or rather is ho ho ho ho. Could this also be possibly trivia worthy?A Wikia Helper 21:52, February 7, 2011 (UTC)

only navigator without a log pose?

Shouldn't it be mentioned under his trivia, that he is only known navigator to lack a log pose?A Wikia Helper 21:59, February 7, 2011 (UTC)

No, it's already mentioned in his Navigational Skills section. Yatanogarasu 22:33, February 7, 2011 (UTC)

Laffite's devil fruit ability

i think laffite's ability is pegasus mythical creature type. rarer that pre-hestoric type. what do you guys think?

This isn't the place to discuss it. Take it to a forum, and sign your posts.DancePowderer Talk 03:41, June 14, 2011 (UTC)

Nami Antithesis?

I know these guys are generally supposed to be an antithesis, but I noticed that Lafitte might be even moreso in comparison to the Straw Hat navigator, Nami. My reasoning:

• Prior to becoming Pirates, Laffitte was a police officer and Nami was a thief, putting them on opposite ends of the law.
• While Nami was of the "good thief" archetype, stealing only from malicious characters and doing so for a good cause, Laffitte was a police man known for his excessive and cruel methods, fulfilling the "corrupt cop" archetype.
• Nami can be crass and insulting, while Lafitte is quiet and apparently well-mannered.
• Nami's East Blue, Laffitte West Blue (I know it's minor, but I figured I'd mention it).

Anyone else see the especially stark contrast between the two navigators?--Kagimizu-Seeya 'round 08:48, January 20, 2012 (UTC)

So...? What are you suggesting? Its nothing special, ok... LPKWhat?01:33,1/21/2012

Yeah, basically the entire Blackbeard Pirate crew is nothing but a Straw Hat antithesis right now. _••PX15.._•• 01:41, January 21, 2012 (UTC)

Yes, but aside from Blackbeard and Doc Q, Laffitte is the only one with noticeable and very obvious contradictions compared to Nami. So is this worth being noted in the trivia?--Kagimizu-Seeya 'round 02:22, January 21, 2012 (UTC)

No, because every character can contrast another character. Luffy contrasts Bellamy, for instance. It's not worth noting.DancePowderer Talk 02:53, January 21, 2012 (UTC)

Yes Bellamy and Luffy contrast each other, but only in terms of personality and dream philosophy. There are more specific, more noticeable contrasts between these two, and the contrast in general is intentional. Sure every character can contrast another, but it isn't always intentional, and not to this degree.--Kagimizu-Seeya 'round 05:34, January 21, 2012 (UTC)

To end this.. Its not triviaworthy. Not at all. LPKWhat?21:32,1/21/2012

Character comparisons are almost always never a good idea, this being one of those times.DancePowderer Talk 21:49, January 21, 2012 (UTC)

Well Van Augur is also a big anthithesis to Usopp, weapons wise and personality wise... Considering that the Blackbead pirates are very probably the final boss of the series and main antagonists I think the anthisesis make sense, at least for some characters

Grievous67 (talk) 17:32, July 26, 2015 (UTC)

Diamond Dogs

Okay, as I am not the first to point this out, I am surprised I am the first to bring it up here in the Talk page. How ever, it has been discussed for years that Oda, like his many other celebrity appearance based characters, got most if not all the inspiration for Laffitte's design from David Bowie. The style of David Bowie in discussion here is from his hit single, 'Rebel Rebel' Off of his 1973 album, "Diamond Dogs." But like many character celebrity looks, Laffitte doesn't have every. single. detail; some originality had to be involved. The eye patch and colors, specifically. I do have a link to some thing four years ago that also brought up this appearance: 

Inspiration of OP Characters

And the music video to 'Rebel Rebel'. I am interested in hearing your thoughts, so long as you're not going to be biased on disagreeing with me when there is clearly no reason you should.

[[File:David Bowie - Rebel Rebel|thumb|center|335 px]] Snagov (talk) 05:07, December 30, 2015 (UTC)