Kozuki Clan/Mokomo Dukedom in Allies Section Edit
Well of course, we should do that.
Individual characters seems like a no-no. But do we include the whole Mokomo Dukedom as a part of the "Kozuki Clan", or are they separate entities? Talk | 01:34, March 15, 2016 (UTC)
- Asking the correct question, JSD! We definitely shouldn't add individual characters, not when they're all part of the same organization. But exactly which organization they belong to is the question. I think going with the "Kozuki Clan" is the safer bet for now, so let's go with it. Jademing (talk) 03:05, March 17, 2016 (UTC)
On second thought, it's called the "Ninja-Mink-Pirate alliance", I think we should consider the minks separately. Talk | 11:39, March 18, 2016 (UTC)
That could be redundant considering that the Mink leaders are already retainers of the Kozuki Family.
One could argue that because the entire tribe is under Inuarashi and Nekomamushi, they're in a way subservient to the Kozuki Family despite not being retainers. Chapter 815 showed this well, with every mink kneeling down.
Yes, but the forces they represent are still vastly different. One is a family in one country, the other is the entire force of a country. They both get their names directly mentioned in the alliance by Luffy, I think they should be both represented separately in the gallery. Let the article explain why the alliance between them exists. Talk | 18:14, March 24, 2016 (UTC)
We probably shouldn't base our articles on the stupid names Luffy utters once in a while, though I still agree that both the 'dukedom' and Kozuki retainers should be counted as different entities. Just for simplicity's sake.18:21, March 24, 2016 (UTC)
The alliance in the manga clearly views the Minks as separated from the Kozuki Family. "Ninja-Mink-Pirate" Alliance, hello? So we should view the Kozuki Family and the Minks as two entirely different entities. In that case, let them be represented separately in the gallery as JSD said. Jademing (talk) 18:24, March 24, 2016 (UTC)
It is now formatted correctly. Talk | 17:54, May 31, 2016 (UTC)