5,654 Pages


The sword has only been mentioned once in name only... Yet here wehave a price tage and a picture? --One-Winged Hawk 23:27, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm almost positive that picture isn't in any official source. 08:06, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
I'm thinking the source is offically, but its the WRONG sword. --One-Winged Hawk 08:16, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Again, I'm asking if ANYONE can confirm the stuff on this page: Price and picture. I suspect we have the wrong sword picture here and the price may also be made-up. --One-Winged Hawk 07:50, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Never mind, found it out myself...
ARGH! Okay I found out whats the siutation is, I thought the sword was identical to another one we have up. The picture is the same as the Wadō Ichimonji just with some of the things on it missing, the pictures here are the same + the writing is IDENITCAL. The price is also the 3RD generation demon splitters price tag, not the 2nd. I knew this was wrong!
Okay confirming difference: Same text, same name, but top illustrations are missing and the picture is not the same quality. --One-Winged Hawk 07:56, 12 September 2008 (UTC)


Luffy is not a swordsman nor does he own any sword. Borrowing something doesn't mean you are the owner of it. Not to mention you don't put something as ridiculous as that in the info box for ownership. SeaTerror (talk) 19:33, July 22, 2018 (UTC)

Ippon-Matsu is not a swordsman either, nor is there any proof that Kotetsu or Hitetsu are. And where does it say only swordsmen are classified as "owners"? Rhavkin (talk) 20:45, July 22, 2018 (UTC)

Nowhere. You're the only one who even said that. Luffy isn't an owner anyway. SeaTerror (talk) 00:50, July 23, 2018 (UTC)

Said what? And didn't I already explained to you what an owner is? Rhavkin (talk) 02:41, July 23, 2018 (UTC)

No you posted a definition of a word that doesn't even apply. SeaTerror (talk) 03:53, July 23, 2018 (UTC)

The definition of the word "owner" from webster dictionary doesn't apply when discussing what an "owner" is? Go ahead and provide a better one if you please. Rhavkin (talk) 03:58, July 23, 2018 (UTC)

No the definition of the word owner doesn't apply to somebody who borrowed something. SeaTerror (talk) 16:16, July 23, 2018 (UTC)

Does changing the dictionaries necessary? Whatever, let's go with yours. Luffy isn't simply listed as owner, but has a "(borrowed)" next to him. After he borrowed the sword, it is in his possession, thus he temporary owns it, and he is free to as his own (Own - Have (something) as one's own; possess) until he gives it back. Rhavkin (talk) 16:48, July 23, 2018 (UTC)

Owner is somebody who actually owns something. Luffy is not the owner. Also don't twist definitions around.

pronoun & adjective

1Used with a possessive to emphasize that someone or something belongs or relates to the person mentioned. Not to mention your own part of the definition is about actual ownership with the examples provided. SeaTerror (talk) 17:14, July 23, 2018 (UTC)

On the same logic your presenting, Kotetsu is also not its owner, but its maker, and Hitetsu is its keeper. I'm getting really tired talking to you if you ignore everything that doesn't suit your opinion. Just find any third person to settle this, YOUR PICK, let's just stop going back and forth when you aren't willing to listen. Rhavkin (talk) 21:01, July 23, 2018 (UTC)

It's been over a week and you found no one. Rhavkin (talk) 05:52, August 2, 2018 (UTC)

Even if Luffy uses the sword to fight, he would not be the owner. Zoro isn't considered a owner of Johnny and Yosaku's swords because he used them during Arlong Park. It is the same thing. He is borrowing it. Montblanc Noland :: Talk 15:16, August 2, 2018 (UTC)

If their swords had a page then it would. Rhavkin (talk) 15:47, August 2, 2018 (UTC)

They would not have Zoro as an owner for borrowing it. Tashigi isn't an Owner for Smoker's Jitte and vice-versa with the Shigure. That's not how ownership works. Montblanc Noland :: Talk 16:02, August 2, 2018 (UTC)

When did either of them used the other's sword? Rhavkin (talk) 16:28, August 2, 2018 (UTC)

They used them when they were in each other's bodies (i.e. Smoker using the Jitte in Tashigi's body and vice versa). It makes about as much sense as someone borrowing something and being listed as owner. Montblanc Noland :: Talk 18:00, August 2, 2018 (UTC)

No. Its still the same person just in different body. THAT make as much sense as saying Nami is a cyborg or has Haki. Rhavkin (talk) 18:35, August 2, 2018 (UTC)

Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.