Punk Hazard Arc - "First" Outfit[edit source]
And this is why I don't like you guys. You're not making any sense. Luffy and Zoro are wearing their clothes from the Return to SA to FI Arcs. They did not change into anything new, nor is "taking off one's top" considered an actually outfit. Please explain to me why them taking off their clothes considered a DIFFERENT outfit, then.--NinjaSheik 17:22, September 8, 2012 (UTC)
An outfit is set of clothes worn together. Zoro is still wearing his kimono. He did not change, did not put anything on. He took off his kimono top and showed his bare chest. Are you going to count every time he takes off his shirt as an "outfit", too?--NinjaSheik 17:28, September 8, 2012 (UTC)
Yes it should be an outfit. You proved my point by saying "An outfit is set of clothes worn together." the set of clothes changed, therefore it is a new outfit. Galaxy9000 (talk) 17:30, September 8, 2012 (UTC)
Some very helpful editing advice, Sheik: When discussing various issues on the wiki, please do not take it as an opportunity to trash our editors, tradtions, and ways of doing things EVERY. SINGLE. TIME. Discuss only the issue at hand without making things personal.
As far as this actual isusse: Removing clothing leads to a change in appearance. And a change in appearance is a different outfit. Therefore, the early PH outfits are new outfits. Talk | 17:31, September 8, 2012 (UTC)
Also, when we move disscussion to talk pages, the edits MUST STOP. Continuing to undo the edits while the discussion occurs is a violation of our rules. The pictures stay for now. Talk | 17:33, September 8, 2012 (UTC)
I request this edit war to STOP, and let the opposing sides tell their thoughts on here. Otherwise, if this war will drag on, I'll request the admins to lock the page. We wouldn't want that, do we?17:45, September 8, 2012 (UTC)
Your decision is not making any logical sense. Stop twisting the definition of the word "outfit". As I put above, an outfit a set of clothing worn together, a "set" meaning various pieces of clothing to make one whole. For example: A pair of jeans and a jacket is an outfit. However, is rolling up the jeans to above your ankles count as a "different" outfit? No, it does not. You're still wearing the same clothes, a a pair of jeans and a jacket. It shouldn't matter what WAY it is worn.
Zoro is still wearing his kimono from the previous arcs, therefore it does not count. Are you saying that every time he takes off his kimono top it counts as an new outfit? He did that during his fight at the Fishman Island arc, too. Does Zoro wearing his bandanna also change as new outfit when he wears it in an arc with a new outfit, too, then? Because Zoro also wears his bandanna a lot for a lot of arcs with different outfit. Take his yellow, unzipped jacket as an example. He put his green bandanna during his fight with Kaku.--NinjaSheik 18:03, September 8, 2012 (UTC)
Are you even reading what I wrote above? The definition of "set" a collection of things that goes together to make a whole. Are you using the word "set" as a verb instead of a noun?--NinjaSheik 18:09, September 8, 2012 (UTC)
I think you are using the word "set" as a verb, not a noun. The word "set" does have a lot of meaning. As a verb, it can mean many, such as "put down", "decide on", "adjust" or "arrange". The way you're saying that by taking off the top layer of his kimono, you're using the word "set" as a verb, not a noun.
As a noun, "set" can mean things like "group or collection" which are brought together by different things or a posture of someone. When using to describe clothes, "set" is used a noun. A set of clothing, meaning pieces of different clothes put together to make an outfit.--NinjaSheik 18:20, September 8, 2012 (UTC)
Even though Zoro took off his top, he is still wearing his kimono. A kimono is a robe, one long piece of fabric. Therefore, a kimono can't be count as a set of clothes because it's actually just a long fabric, not an outfit put from different pieces of clothing.
Now if you count together his kimono along with his trousers that is an outfit. Because it is a "set" of clothes. Since Zoro is still wearing both, it is not a different outfit. He didn't change his kimono. He just took off the top layer, it is still on his body. And don't forget, he put it right back on when they reached the cold side of the island.--NinjaSheik 18:25, September 8, 2012 (UTC)
It is the same set of clothes, yet they are arranged differently. This leads to a different appearance. The the set of clothing worn has been rearranged, leading to a new outfit.
Regardess of Zoro's outfit, for Luffy it's the first time we've seen him shirtless after the TS. That is important to note in a picture.
This whole "outfit" gallery thing is crap though. It should be outfits and changes in appearance. And merged with the appearance section too...Talk | 18:29, September 8, 2012 (UTC)
So you are using the word "set" as a verb! Not necessarily, no, taking one's top does not count as different outfit. Now, I do agree with you count his coat that he stole and put that over his kimono can automatically changed it to a different outfit. He added a new piece of clothing to his body, therefore, yes, creating a new outfit (but did Zoro took off that coat in the newest chapter).
However, I think the main problem is the wording of the caption. Instead of just saying "first out", why not just "shirtless" for them? There is a line between outfit and appearance. Outfit refers to the clothes, appearance refers to how one looks as a whole.--NinjaSheik 18:38, September 8, 2012 (UTC)
Alright, Ninja, apparently most of the users on the chat agree with you about the caption. So I changed it to shirtless. Fine with you?18:48, September 8, 2012 (UTC)
Fine, just as long as the information is correct. Although "shirtless outfit" sounds weird. And technically, a kimono isn't a shirt. So, maybe "topless" would be a more accurate way to put?--NinjaSheik 18:52, September 8, 2012 (UTC)
Well, if a kimono is one piece (pun unintented) then it wouldn't have a top either.... Talk | 18:54, September 8, 2012 (UTC)
Yeah, my bad. I already changed it to "appearance", though. Topless, shirtless, that is another discussion. I'm fine with whichever one, as they both basically say the same thing.18:55, September 8, 2012 (UTC)
Well, the word "topless" does mean "having or leaving the torso uncovered", but they do mean the same thing. But since the wording change, shouldn't caption for the second pic be changed, too? You have take out the "second" out, otherwise, it would look confusing.--NinjaSheik 18:58, September 8, 2012 (UTC)
But by today's nomenclature, topless more often refers to a woman not wearing anything to cover the chest, while shirtless is used for males in that sense.03:50, September 10, 2012 (UTC)