Talk: Dragon Ball Super (anime)

Consistency with GT Discussion[]

Please tell me this isn't some of troll edit or some kind of cruel sick joke! JokerJay779 (talk) 15:45, April 28, 2015 (UTC)

It's real http://www.toei-animation.com/en/content/new_dragon_ball_super {{SUBST:User:Total Mastermind/sig2}} (talk) 16:07, April 28, 2015 (UTC)

Awesome! So Toriyama had like nothing to do with GT right? That is why it sucked? So since he is on board doing the characters and story then this will be way better then GT. JokerJay779 (talk) 21:44, April 28, 2015 (UTC)

""For GT, all I did was come up with the title, design, the initial main cast and some of the machines, and I also did a few images."" — Toriyama, below his sketch of Super Saiyan 4 Goku for Dragon Box GT. Dragon Ball Super is actually going to be written BY him. ~~TenTailedFox ^<talk> 22:22, April 28, 2015 (UTC)

This is identical to what he has done so far for DBS (#NewAcronym). Where's the quote that he will be doing any, actually I don't even know what you mean by "written by". You're suggesting he will be writing all the episode dialogue maybe? He didn't even do that for the original Dragon Ball anime. It's more likely that Toei staff will write the dialogue, and mash in all the inevitable inconsistencies that only nerds like us will pick up on. As far as I know though, no word on who's writing the dialogue. -- 10X.Ka^.me_.ha^.me_.ha^.._.^..talk_.^..._.contrib. 22:34, April 28, 2015 (UTC)

Well since Toriyama is gonna be a lot more involved now I don't we are gonna get another GT. It may be as not as good as the original DBZ but at least it will be a good enough show to watch. JokerJay779 (talk) 22:58, April 28, 2015 (UTC)

The sources don't say Toriyama is going to be a lot more involved. He's doing initial conceptual stuff, but I'm guessing he passes the dialogue along to Toei like he did with GT. On the bright side, we can certainly expect animation quality to be 20 years advanced. -- 10X.Ka^.me_.ha^.me_.ha^.._.^..talk_.^..._.contrib. 23:01, April 28, 2015 (UTC)

The seiyu's of the series talked about Toriyama writing the plot and character designs. That's far more than what he did for Dragon Ball GT.--SuperSaiyaMan (talk) 23:11, April 28, 2015 (UTC)

No, it's the same. Either way, plot events usually determine whether or not series are compatible. -- 10X.Ka^.me_.ha^.me_.ha^.._.^..talk_.^..._.contrib. 23:17, April 28, 2015 (UTC)

The sources say he is writing the story and even the Fuji TV producer, in Toei's press release, states that Toriyama himself is writing the plot. This differs from GT, where Toriyama himself admits that he didn't write it. In fact, the Japanese credits only list him as the original author (as in the creator of the Dragon Ball franchise). GT is no longer a canon debate. Its over. GT is non-canon. ~~TenTailedFox ^<talk> 23:30, April 28, 2015 (UTC)

Additionally, both the Toei Press release and Kazenshuu list Toriyama as both the story author and the original author, which GT never does and never will. ~~TenTailedFox ^<talk> 23:32, April 28, 2015 (UTC)

Ten Tailed Fox, on a side note, can you please use a signature template to hide the full text of your signature? It adds a lot of clutter when editing in source mode, which is required for advanced formatting editing.

To the issue, you did not answer my question about what you mean when you say Toriyama is writing it. We have clarified that Toriyama came up with the conceptual plot. The actual series writing of dialogue has not been attributed to anyone yet. You are 100% wrong about the GT credits. Toriyama is is credited as the series author in addition to a separate credit as the original manga author, as clarified from these screenshots of the credits. That is a direct source that cannot be ignored. Credits from a completed work are fact. Press releases are a prediction, and may change by the time the series is completed. If the DBS project is cancelled we'll sure feel like idiots for taking action based on plans. The rational thing to do is wait until there is enough information that no speculation is required, and we're not there yet. -- 10X.Ka^.me_.ha^.me_.ha^.._.^..talk_.^..._.contrib. 23:56, April 28, 2015 (UTC)

Could have sworn Toriyama did say so. He worked on them, he wrote them. Dude, you're obviously just clinging onto GT like its a neglected child even though it has been retconed over, and over, and over again. And Toriyama never truly wrote on GT, he has said so several times, those Dub Credits were false. If you have a source which says Toriyama didn't say Battle of the Gods and Revival of F aren't canonical to his manga, show it please, since every press every post I've ever read on both SAID that they were.--SuperSaiyaMan (talk) 00:11, April 29, 2015 (UTC)

Requiring a source that anything is canon or not is pointless, as Toriyama and Toei don't use the fan term canon ever. Toriyama is credited as the original author (hint, hint: manga) on Battle of Gods. The screenplay (as in 100% of the actual writing for this film) was written by Yûsuke Watanabe. A lot of what you said appears to be fluff attacks on me. Stick to the facts and don't guess what I'm thinking, it detracts from the discussion. -- 10X.Ka^.me_.ha^.me_.ha^.._.^..talk_.^..._.contrib. 00:19, April 29, 2015 (UTC)

Xenoverse has made GT an alternate timeline, like future trunks timeline. Toriyama has much more influence and control over this new series, GT is basically a giant filler episode.. 

http://www.kanzenshuu.com/2015/04/28/new-dragon-ball-super-tv-series-announced-for-2015/ QuakingStar (talk) 00:23, April 29, 2015 (UTC)

But Toriyama goes onto say that Battle of the Gods takes place between the last two manga chapters and acts like its in tune to his manga. Videl is pregnant. Bulma has a birthday. Vegeta shows the character development he got. Toriyama had a massive amount of involvement and treated it just like he did his own manga. Same with Revival of F. 'Canon' isn't a fanmade term either, Ten-Tailed Fox explained it just fine. And not only that, Toriyama created a canonical timeline of the post-Z events without ANY GT mention.

And you have to admit, it feels like you're putting too much stock in a series that is outdated and contradicted by later information and movies and an new anime. This is the only site I've ever seen that still lists GT as canon instead of labeling what everyone else has guessed: that is not.--SuperSaiyaMan (talk) 00:26, April 29, 2015 (UTC)

The only thing where GT is canon, would only be the SSJ4 Transformation.. QuakingStar (talk) 00:41, April 29, 2015 (UTC)

Doesn't seem like even that is canon anymore. Its been retconed with the addition of Super Saiyan God and Super Saiyan God Super Saiyan.--SuperSaiyaMan (talk) 00:45, April 29, 2015 (UTC)

Not necessarily, if GT has in fact been turned into an alternate universe like Xenoverse says, then it is still part of it all.. just not part of the REAL, main timeline. QuakingStar (talk) 00:47, April 29, 2015 (UTC)

Xenoverse is a video game with no involvement from Toriyama whatsoever. Toriyama has had the same involvement with DBS so far that he did with GT, and the only press release indicates that will continue to be the case. Filler is a term for non-manga based anime episodes used to delay while the manga is being written, and neither GT nor DBS qualify. Canon is a fan term when used to describe Dragon Ball material, and Ten Tailed Fox's use of the term is a fan's use of the term. So is the use in our Manual of Style, all fan usage. Videl being pregnant (with Pan) brings it closer to GT continuity, not farther. Bulma's birthday and Vegeta training are obviously expected in a 10 year gap. To me, the only interesting continuity question about DBS concerning GT is whether or not the plots will contradict each other, and we don't know that yet. -- 10X.Ka^.me_.ha^.me_.ha^.._.^..talk_.^..._.contrib. 00:52, April 29, 2015 (UTC)

The problem with your argument, is that no matter how much we debate or how much proof is brought from our or your end. You are obviously biased to GT, hell.. SSJ4 Goku is even in your Icon Image and your name is even 10XKamehameha which is a GT only version of the Kamehameha. QuakingStar (talk) 00:57, April 29, 2015 (UTC)

No, those events were to show the movie was in canon to the manga. Canon is a term that is used everywhere, why should Dragon Ball be any different 10x Kamehameha? And the moment Gods of Destruction and Super Saiyan God were revealed was the moment that Dragon Ball GT was completely shown not to happen. Its not even a matter of continuity at this point: there are elements of GT that aren't in the manga at all. The Tuffles for example never existed in the primary source. Toriyama had extensive involvement in the new movies, moreso than any involvement in GT. And then, we get a revelation of a new series...yet still the clinging to GT happens instead of a reevaluation of everything we have to do here. That isn't right.--SuperSaiyaMan (talk) 01:00, April 29, 2015 (UTC)

I think it's unfair of you to claim I have a bias based on a picture I posted. I could claim that Ten Tailed Fox is biased against movies being canon because he has experience with Naruto, but I don't because that's irrelevant. I'm presenting facts only, not my opinions. Frankly, I think using the word canon is completely useless because the content owners don't use the term themselves. Star Wars and Sherlock Holmes use canon, not Dragon Ball.

Back to facts and not opinions, when we break it down, all we got today was an announcement that another anime series is in the works. We need more information to make important conclusions, such as whether or not Beerus, Whis, and the SSG form will appear, and whether or not this series will have plot contradictions (only thing I can think of is permanent main character death) with GT. -- 10X.Ka^.me_.ha^.me_.ha^.._.^..talk_.^..._.contrib. 01:03, April 29, 2015 (UTC)

SuperSaiyaMan, your argument about elements not in the manga at all applied to Xenoverse, BoG, OVA's, and DBS, as well as GT. Irrelevant. -- 10X.Ka^.me_.ha^.me_.ha^.._.^..talk_.^..._.contrib. 01:04, April 29, 2015 (UTC)

Hey guys, quick question. Are we discussing re-categorizing everything on the site into canon vs. non-canon, or are we discussing putting these two movies at a higher level of canon than GT? Our Manual of Style uses levels, not yes/no. -- 10X.Ka^.me_.ha^.me_.ha^.._.^..talk_.^..._.contrib. 01:05, April 29, 2015 (UTC)

Except I'm not using Xenoverse. Goku's Return OVA, BOG, and ROF all had extensive involvement by Toriyama. They were tied into the series. Again, this is the ONLY site, (a wiki for god's sake) which still treats GT as canon instead of putting it where it really was. Ten-Tailed Fox isn't being biased, however, it kind of feels like you are.--SuperSaiyaMan (talk) 01:08, April 29, 2015 (UTC)

You couldn't argue that. Toriyama himself said he considers the movies as part of a different timeline than his series, just like Future Trunks' time—with the exception of BoG and RoF (he specifically cites the first 13 DBZ movies and the first 3 DB movies). But he's right, guys. This wiki has never done its job when it comes to the facts and we shouldn't be trying to raise our expectations for this announcement either. The press release says the new anime will tie into the latest movie "Resurrection F". The admins ignore it. Toriyama is credited as the original story author and the story author for this series in the press release. The admins ignore it. At this point, its time for a new Dragon Ball Wiki: one that isn't afraid to adapt to the times and will look at the facts from an unbias stance, rather than as a fan who only wants their series to be right and screw the original author and everyone else like is done here. It's just like SaiyaMan said. This wiki is known across the anime Wikias for its inaccuracy and blatant ignoring of facts, as well as being a breading ground for speculation in what is supposed to be an encyclopedic environment. For the time being, I'm pulling out. This wiki is hopeless. ~~TenTailedFox ^<talk> 01:12, April 29, 2015 (UTC)

Correct, Toriyama considers the movies as a different dimension, no arguments. Garlic Jr. saga is referenced in the manga, but that's the only exception I know of. Wrong about the press release calling it a "tie-in", it just says DBS will follow the recent movie releases. Right about Toriyama being listed as the author, same as GT. I welcome your creation of a new wiki, and thank you for your contributions. -- 10X.Ka^.me_.ha^.me_.ha^.._.^..talk_.^..._.contrib. 01:17, April 29, 2015 (UTC)

There is another wikia, haven't really delved into it yet Ten Tails.

http://www.dragonballencyclopedia.com/qdb/Dragon_Ball_Encyclopedia

It looks like it might be what you're looking for. QuakingStar (talk) 01:19, April 29, 2015 (UTC)

I promise tha I'm carrying no bias and only relying on facts. I will say that every. single. time. a new piece of Dragon Ball media comes out, a group of new users shows up, does not read the Manual of Style (which you have clearly not, SuperSaiyaMan) and attempts to retcon a slew of material. -- 10X.Ka^.me_.ha^.me_.ha^.._.^..talk_.^..._.contrib. 01:20, April 29, 2015 (UTC)

DBE is pretty similar to this site, I'd recommend http://ultradragonball.wikia.com/wiki/Ultra_Dragon_Ball_Wiki -- 10X.Ka^.me_.ha^.me_.ha^.._.^..talk_.^..._.contrib. 01:22, April 29, 2015 (UTC)

That's...a FANON wiki.--SuperSaiyaMan (talk) 01:33, April 29, 2015 (UTC)

Make a manga-only wiki if that's what you want. It's an obvious bias against non-manga material, but something like dragonballmanga.wikia.com is probably available. I'll even help, or avoid it completely, your choice. -- 10X.Ka^.me_.ha^.me_.ha^.._.^..talk_.^..._.contrib. 01:37, April 29, 2015 (UTC)

Toriyama is doing the retconing. Not the users. The Manual of Style may guide this wiki, but it doesn't guide Dragon Ball or Akira Toriyama. This is my wiki: Dragon Universe Wiki. Its only a day in production, but it's high time a Wikia wiki got Dragon Ball right and this one just isn't doing its job. It refuses to heed change, the articles are written in no particular style (you have quotes in the text because no one monitors what is actually going in, save, when like Goku20, they don't like a user; then it's a feeding frenzy). Sourced information is thrown out the window like it is nothing and then the newbie gets attacked, rather than the aggressor user. A new series gets announced and we have admins ignoring the facts left and right. That will not the be the case there. Sysops will respect the users and the content and the users won't be allowed to bully anyone or use the "rules" to bully them either. You do realize this isn't just my opinion, yes? I cannot even begin to count the number of people who warned me about this place—good respectable users too—and now I see why. This is how the Wikia community sees this place. I can only hope my wiki will be much safer and productive for those who wish to contribute. ~~TenTailedFox ^<talk> 01:35, April 29, 2015 (UTC)

Using the manga as your only primary source is an obvious bias, but I hope for the best in your new wiki. I fully acknowledge that a select group of manga-biased users exist and would like to omit anything not written by Toriyama. However, that is against Wikia's neutral point of view and non-biased policy, as this community has interpreted them. -- 10X.Ka^.me_.ha^.me_.ha^.._.^..talk_.^..._.contrib. 01:41, April 29, 2015 (UTC)

Also, Wikia legal policy states that anyone can use work done by editors here (like the articles themselves), but the article must be used as a reference. Copying the article content, even just pieces of it, is illegal. I notice that you have already done so, so please either remove the parts of the articles here that you have copied, oe put a reference somewhere on the page to the list of contributors that worked on the article here. -- 10X.Ka^.me_.ha^.me_.ha^.._.^..talk_.^..._.contrib. 01:46, April 29, 2015 (UTC)

Manga is the primary source on most anime-based wiki's. Its the first and most important area of a work here.--SuperSaiyaMan (talk) 01:43, April 29, 2015 (UTC)

I fully agree. First an most important, but not the only. We list information from all officially, licensed sources. No fan work of course. -- 10X.Ka^.me_.ha^.me_.ha^.._.^..talk_.^..._.contrib. 01:46, April 29, 2015 (UTC)

The manga is the only primary source. Anything written by the original author is a primary source. Everything based on that, like the anime, is a secondary source. Everything based on the anime (like GT was) is a tertiary source. That's how literature works. Its not bias. That's how educated human beings treat a work of literature. Not this wiki, though, and that's exactly why it is known for being unreliable as a source. ~~TenTailedFox ^<talk> 01:46, April 29, 2015 (UTC)

Humans beings that are also Dragon Ball fans are more familiar with the anime then the manga. My source is the poll on our home page. Ignoring everything that's not manga is absolutely bias, and doing so when most of your readers are anime viewers is hugely detrimental. Educated human beings understand what the purpose of a website is before demanding it be altered. -- 10X.Ka^.me_.ha^.me_.ha^.._.^..talk_.^..._.contrib. 01:51, April 29, 2015 (UTC)

FYI, no copied content on DUW, my apologies for looking too fast. -- 10X.Ka^.me_.ha^.me_.ha^.._.^..talk_.^..._.contrib. 01:58, April 29, 2015 (UTC)

The anime would be considered a source, but a secondary source. However using it as the primary source of information on a wiki is just factually wrong since many things in the anime contradict the manga or aren't even present. Like the Tuffles issue: its not anywhere in the manga yet is continually used in the Anime (even for Dragon Ball GT). When that happens, it should be considered sencondary, and when GT uses it it should be considered even less than a normal source.--SuperSaiyaMan (talk) 02:07, April 29, 2015 (UTC)

Since some of you clearly think that we use the anime as our primary source here goes the proofing you all wrong "

1. .The original Dragon Ball manga
2. .The anime series, including Dragon Ball, Dragon Ball Z, and Dragon Ball GT
3. .Movies, TV specials, and new Dragon Ball manga
4. .Authorized guides and statements as follows:

1. 1. .Statements by Akira Toriyama (author of the original manga series)
   2. .Statements by Toei (producer of the anime and author of the GT portion of the series)
   3. .Authorized guides (discussion may be required to gauge relative importance)
2. .Video games
3. .Licensed collectible card games" That is from the MoS. Have a horrible day.  Goku20  Talk  ULTRA DBZ  ULTRA POKEMON  02:33,4/29/2015 

SuperSaiyaMan, that's exactly how we treat the anime, it is secondary to manga. We do list anime events that occur outside of the manga, but we don't replace manga plot events. If there is a direct contradiction, we list both versions and say which is from which place. Would you please do me a favor and read the Manual of Style? You're arguing about some things we already agree on... -- 10X.Ka^.me_.ha^.me_.ha^.._.^..talk_.^..._.contrib. 02:36, April 29, 2015 (UTC)

Except I have read the Manual of Style. I looked on it the first time. The reason why I keep harping on this for DBGT is because it uses anime only information, which should be, as a rule, not considered on the same level as the manga. Correct? Then why should we treat it like such when it seems that things have constantly changed?--SuperSaiyaMan (talk) 02:39, April 29, 2015 (UTC)

GT is not treated as the same level as manga. However, it doesn't contradict the manga so we keep it on the site. Omitting GT info does not make the manga info less important, and removing GT from the site like some people suggest is not encyclopedic. A good example of something that contradicts the manga is Dragon Ball SD. This manga was not written by Toriyama, and offers an alternate version of the original manga. We do not include DBSD info in the bios. -- 10X.Ka^.me_.ha^.me_.ha^.._.^..talk_.^..._.contrib. 02:43, April 29, 2015 (UTC)

No one said anything a bout omitting Dragon Ball GT. Just putting it in its proper place on the articles while acknowledging that things had changed since the 90's. Hence why I gave the suggestion earlier of organizing the DBGT bits below the current new movies, since Toriyama seems to treat them on the same level of his manga (and checking the article, he wrote both, co-wrote Battle of the Gods and wrote Revival of F) in between the time of the Buu Saga and last chapter.--SuperSaiyaMan (talk) 02:46, April 29, 2015 (UTC)

If we're just talking about placement in the article, we can do it one of two ways: by media type or by the fictional timeline. Currently we do it by media type, but manga and anime are together since the events overlap so much. If we did it by timeline, the BoG movies would be in the middle, but the other films would be too. Combining style by putting some movies mixed with manga but leaving others out is confusing for readers. The purpose of this site is to quickly get readers any info they want on anything Dragon Ball. Deciding what is more important to purest fans is very, very low on our list of priorities because it does not help most readers at all, it only appeases a small group of fans. For someone skimming Vegeta's article and wondering what role he plays in the fight against Beerus, it is far more obvious for them to click the "movies" section than to read his entire bio until BoG comes up in event order. Thus, the article formatting is designed around ease of use (Wiki literally translates to "fast" in Hawaiian), and not around canon. -- 10X.Ka^.me_.ha^.me_.ha^.._.^..talk_.^..._.contrib. 03:26, April 29, 2015 (UTC)

What does the Hawaiian translation of an English word have to do with anything? Only langauages that matter here are English and Japanese. QuakingStar (talk) 03:35, April 29, 2015 (UTC)

The reason why Hawaiian matters is because Wikia, like Wikipedia, is meant as a very fast encyclopedia. "Wikipedia" literally means fast encyclopedia, and Wikia has the same approach. Our mission is to give people a comprehensive database of information that they can use with blinding speed. Want to know Cell's Brazilian Voice actor? You can get there in 2 clicks. Try the same thing on http://www.kanzenshuu.com/ and see how long it takes. Ease of use and comprehensiveness are higher priorities than purest fan agendas. Wikia also specifically requires not having any bias, and keeping a neutral point of view. I respect any fan who wants to create a manga-only site that hides non-manga info, but pro-manga bias against the much more popular anime media is not what this site exists for. -- 10X.Ka^.me_.ha^.me_.ha^.._.^..talk_.^..._.contrib. 03:46, April 29, 2015 (UTC)

Do you really think we're stupid? Or are you honestly suggesting that you can't just put "Battle of Gods" under the canon series of events and people can't click that and get there instantly? Most anime wikis are designed to arrange content in a sensible order: canon first, non-canon second, all other materials after that. Never had a user complain about not being able to click on the title they want in the Table of Contents, because god forbid it wasn't all the way down in the movie section, but was in fact with the canon material where they expected it to be to begin with. You preach a good game with usability, but when you're known as a primarily unreliable wiki (seriously, go read Dragon Ball Minus sometime and tell me if you think that was written to a Manual of Style or by a 10 year old — then compare to some of the other anime sites, like Bleach Wiki, One Piece Wiki, and Narutopedia — you guys look like elementary school kids writing these articles) then you've defeated the whole purpose of easy navigation. ~~TenTailedFox ^<talk> 05:33, April 29, 2015 (UTC)

Ten Tailed Fox, you have been blocked before for making personal attacks and it will happen again if you continue. I find that resorting to personal attacks is a sign that evidence has failed a user in a discussion and you've resorted to attacking people instead of ideas. Claiming that the distinction of canon vs. non-canon for a series with creators that have never uttered the word "canon" is somehow an easier distinction than movie vs. book is nonsense. Canon-based page organization is obviously more confusing to common readers than media-based organization. Use of special tabs that hide material declared non-canon by is fans is twice as much of a barrier: the only benefit is appeasing some of a minority of fans obsessed with branding everything into ill-fitting canonocity groups. -- 10X.Ka^.me_.ha^.me_.ha^.._.^..talk_.^..._.contrib. 06:32, April 29, 2015 (UTC)

Question: it works for the other three big wikis, why can't it work here? Kishimoto, Oda, and Kubo never use the term 'canon' when saying what belongs in line with their manga and what doesn't, yet its easy to do what is and what is not on those other three sites. Common readers to the Naruto, One Piece, and Bleach wiki's all don't show any confusion there, so why are you saying it'd cause confusion here?--SuperSaiyaMan (talk) 06:42, April 29, 2015 (UTC)

It causes more confusion for readers at those sites than a media based page format would. Using myself as an example, I've read those 3 manga collections and watched the anime series. If I'm on a character's article and want to know about what they did in a movie titled XYZ, the obvious thing to do is have a section for movies with a subsection for movie XYZ. If instead the sections are grouped into canon and non-canon, now I don't know the first step to get to the info I wanted. Whoever is even aware of what canon (if any) exists is pleased that their bias is being expressed on the wiki, but the readers unaware of canon or with a different opinion of canon are worse off. Grouping by canon doesn't help readers get info, it actually hinders it. Grouping by media helps. It's very simple. -- 10X.Ka^.me_.ha^.me_.ha^.._.^..talk_.^..._.contrib. 07:02, April 29, 2015 (UTC)

But...it doesn't cause confusion on those sites. Everything is well organized. Hell, if you go to Naruto's article on Narutopedia, you'll have an ease of navigation due to the table of contents that can easily be clicked. Try to find information on The Last: Naruto the Movie and there's a convenient link in the table of contents for it in its appropriate area (between 699 and 700, the 'Blank Period'). The non-canon movies are all listed below all the canon information as well as video game appearances and character creation. A media based format however just seems more confusing, people who want to see Battle of the Gods or Revival of F information would, instead of finding it in the gap between the Buu Saga and the last chapter, would become confused on why they're put in the movies section despite Toriyama saying they were in line with his manga. Hence, they'd lose interest and go to visit alternative sites.--SuperSaiyaMan (talk) 07:11, April 29, 2015 (UTC)

It seems that way to you and your little buddy because even though you all have been user's on this wiki longer then me at least you all have not been very active on here. Also BoG and RF are movies and as such belong in the movie section just like the video games belong in their own section. Contraire to how you and your little buddy want this wiki to do things the admins and the creator of this wiki agreed that it would be easier to do it the way it is now so you two are continuing an argument that is not going to go over to good. We accept change but the change you two are wanting is stupid because of the fact that you all don't realize that the site would probably be worst off then it is now. Also the whole readers would get confused over why BoG and RF are not in between the last fight with buu and the chapter after are you serious right now because clearly that isn't the case. I say everything stays the way it is till Toriyama and Toei says what is canon and what isn't since that is pretty much what this has to deal with.  Goku20  Talk  ULTRA DBZ  ULTRA POKEMON  07:32,4/29/2015 

Please address me with respect, Goku20. And yes, people will and have been confused. The other anime wiki's are not only more organized than this one, its easier to find information than it is here. Yet on the Naruto, Bleach, One Piece, Hunter x Hunter, Saint Seiya, etc. all those other wiki's, its easy to navigate than it is here.--SuperSaiyaMan (talk) 07:50, April 29, 2015 (UTC)

Believe what you want and to tell you the truth I haven't disrespected you yet (even though I should have already for sticking your nose in mine and TenTailedFox's business). I find it easier here everyone has their own opinion. If you respect me which includes keeping your nose out of my business I will respect you I would have respected you and TenTailedFox if you both would have just been civil and for you let me, 10X, and TenTailedFox handle what was going on and on TenTailedFox if he wouldn't have tried to intimidate me by threating to go to the Wikia staff. Bottom line is that this site has its way to do things and what you are proposing would make us have to change that. You want me to address you with respect when I was you clearly think when anyone says what I did isn't showing you respect.  Goku20  Talk  ULTRA DBZ  ULTRA POKEMON  07:54,4/29/2015 

Change is hard, Goku20. Everything this site had kind of worked before we began getting new material. When I first came here I found it really confusing on the placement of stuff, and how GT was being treated. Even though you have your own way of doing things here: it makes the site less professional than other wiki's. Everything I proposed works on those wiki's there, there is absolutely no reason it wouldn't work here other than the work not wanting to be done.--SuperSaiyaMan (talk) 18:55, April 29, 2015 (UTC)

As much as I agree that we re-structure the wiki so that only Toriyama developed Dragon Ball material is regarded as "canon". I think that this discussion is pointless until we actually have information about DBS, we currently have absolutely nothing on it. We should wait until this series is released, and then decide whether to change or not.--Neffyarious (talk) 08:22, April 29, 2015 (UTC)

• Also, a couple points: Garlic Jr. Saga was not referenced in the manga, only the anime. DBS has more Toriyama influence that DBGT, he is writing the plot and creating the characters for DBS, he only did a few character and vehicle designs for the Black Star Dragon Ball Saga of GT, after that he had no influence on the DBGT series.--Neffyarious (talk) 08:22, April 29, 2015 (UTC)

SuperSaiyaMan, your scenario is completely implausible. Some 10 year old sees a movie, sees we have a movie section, and ignores it? That's not possible. Then, the same viewer "would become confused on why they're put in the movies section despite Toriyama saying they were in line with his manga"??? When you were 10 and watched Sunday morning cartoons, I'm betting you couldn't quote the original version of the media's original author's stance on a media canon, much less a fan interpretation of the canon like you're suggesting we apply here. But you know what, I'm positive you could tell whether you were physically located in your house watching TV vs. in a movie theater watching a film. The idea that fan-interpreted canon based off translated, often ambiguous mankaga quotes is somehow easier to know for a casual viewer than their physical location is beyond ludicrous. -- 10X.Ka^.me_.ha^.me_.ha^.._.^..talk_.^..._.contrib. 22:04, April 29, 2015 (UTC)

I haven't been on this wiki in a while (Heyo 10X), and I obviously don't know Toei's plans for the series, but, even as a guy who disliked GT a lot in many areas, I believe both of these series could exist in one continuity, for the moment. If Super only takes place just after Kid Buu is defeated, and sticks within that timeframe of no more than say, 1 or so years after his demise, both this and GT could co-exist peacefully, without one being non-canon. GT took place 15-20 years after Kid Buu was defeated (depending on if you watch the Japanese or FUNimation version). Another possibility is that they could also have two different timelines for the anime, like two timelines had already existed between the manga continuity and the anime continuty. Granted, there's no use in anybody claiming anything as the series has only JUST been announced, and debate about speculation is not enough to confirm a stance on anything, let alone the canonicity of a series 18 years old, even if it was anime-only, so I believe everyone should just wait it out, and see what happens.  You may disagree, but that's how I see it. Try and bee as non-biased as possible, from both sides. I may dislike GT, and I sure know I had a few debates with 10X over its and the movies' canon, and we may never fully agree, but I agree with him on the stance that it could work, and nothing should be stated as fact for the moment.  Dinky Talk 23:21, April 29, 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, but it's really hard to convince people who use the argument "Toriyama made so its canon XD". We know nothing about the series besides the name, but the guys already rushed and even made their own wiki based on their biased view. Sandubadear 23:26, April 29, 2015 (UTC)

If they make their own wiki, that's fine, as long as this wiki remains as bias-free as possible, and doesn't state non-existent facts or claims from people involved in the series that were never actually spoken. GT may become completely non-canon due to Super, Super may completely contradict everything that happens in GT, or they may both fit in well without any major issues.  Elements like the Black Star Dragon Balls were moreso an element of lazy writing more than anything, although it did cause issues. It's just not wise for anyone on any side of the argument to create an article to fit their goal ("GT is awesome, and therefore, canon!" or "GT is awful, it's not canon in order for it to not tarnish the legacy of the series".)  I don't like GT, I consider it lazy and deriviative, but it's not my place to decide if it's canon to the anime, manga, or both. Toriyama did have basic involvement within the films too, and this may be the same with Super. We'll just need to wait till July. No good wiki just adds the absolute newest information and assume pieces of information in order to connect missing pieces without them being officially confirmed. Dinky Talk 23:35, April 29, 2015 (UTC) 

Although i personally think GT isnt canon because of many reasons i feel like everones taking this the wrong way ITS more Dragon Ball we are finally getting a new series and who cares if its canon or not at the end of the day its your decision (but i do know that we need to find a proper label for whether its canon or not). But xenoverse did kind of say that GT is from another timeline so yeah but hey if u like GT then u liked it who cares if its canon or not i personally have had experience debating with 10x about gt canonocity but its his opinion, and what ever u tell 10x he will still believe GT is canon and like it, we should stop bashing each other on whether or not something is canon Legoviking285 (talk) 00:31, April 30, 2015 (UTC)

Your place is here: Dragon Universe Wiki. Sandubadear 00:38, April 30, 2015 (UTC)

Ummmmmm why exactly? Legoviking285 (talk) 00:50, April 30, 2015 (UTC)

Actually I dislike when fans apply the term "canon" to anything Dragon Ball related. People who think I defend GT as canon are missing what my viewpoint really is. I don't say GT is canon, I say it's not non-canon because non-canon is not something any of the series creators have ever applied to anything in DB. Xenoverse is a video game with no involvement from Toriyama at all, and somehow this awful, awful thing called canon convinced otherwise sensible people to say a 20-year-old anime that had at least some input from Toriyama is no longer... liked by Toriyama? Considered official by him? Denounced by him as a mistake? Toriyama loves making new material and some other folks making a game based on his work, whether or not that includes Beerus, can't possibly be used as proof of Toriyama's beliefs. Toriyama doesn't say canon, Toei doesn't say canon, and we shouldn't say canon. Toriyama sometimes says another dimension, so we should too in those cases and not for anything else. -- 10X.Ka^.me_.ha^.me_.ha^.._.^..talk_.^..._.contrib. 01:29, April 30, 2015 (UTC)

Well according to nerdist news and ign this new series will be made by akira Legoviking285 (talk) 11:43, April 30, 2015 (UTC)

"Made by Akira" can mean a wide range of things. For instance, we know he wrote up plot points, but will he write the dialogue too? Will he direct? When quoting sites that are not direct sources, I find it's better to just read whatever direct document they are basing their conclusions on. All we have write now is a press release from Toei, and both Nerdist and IGN are likely reading the same few paragraphs that we did. -- 10X.Ka^.me_.ha^.me_.ha^.._.^..talk_.^..._.contrib.

The "official" Dragon ball history announced by Shueisha *

GT isn't included in official history while BoG and RoF are. ☆ mark is Anime only. Aprkqjtmfpqpf (talk) 08:40, May 24, 2015 (UTC)

The Name[]

Is this a working title or this confirmed? Because this name really sounds a bit 'meh.' DuttPanda (talk) 11:11, April 29, 2015 (UTC)

That's the title they gave in the press release. There's no telling what it will be by the time the series comes out. -- 10X.Ka^.me_.ha^.me_.ha^.._.^..talk_.^..._.contrib. 22:33, April 29, 2015 (UTC)

Timeplacement Confirmed?[]

Please stop adding speculation to the Dragon Ball Super page. There's no source that says it's before the 28th World Martial Arts Tournament Meshack (talk) 01:35, April 30, 2015 (UTC)

I'm not speculating, it refers to the fact that the Buu conflict ends 10 years before DBZ ends (the 28th tourney). If my wording makes that seem unclear, let's brainstorm a rewrite. Please don't just keep editing the page in the meantime, it doesn't help. We can discuss here as long as you'd like until we find a way to word it that we both agree to. -- 10X.Ka^.me_.ha^.me_.ha^.._.^..talk_.^..._.contrib. 02:09, April 30, 2015 (UTC)

Yeah but the 28th World Tournament happens after the Buu Saga, but you're saying it's confirmed that Dragon Ball Super will happen during Bttle of Gods and Resurrection 'F' Meshack (talk) 02:12, April 30, 2015 (UTC)

I guess we can keep it the way you have it. I just think it's confusing Meshack (talk) 02:26, April 30, 2015 (UTC)

I'm not meaning to say it happens during BoG or RF, what makes you think that? It should just be clear that events that take place after the Buu Saga are still within the DBZ timeframe for 10 years after. It's informative for fans to know this isn't necessarily after DBZ, it might be somewhere within it. -- 10X.Ka^.me_.ha^.me_.ha^.._.^..talk_.^..._.contrib. 03:39, April 30, 2015 (UTC)

I'm afraid you're in the wrong here 10X. The wording plainly implies that the series will start 10 years before the 28th Tournament, and we know that this comes off as speculation. The only available information is that it's after the defeat of Majin Buu. It's likely just a problem of wording on your part though, so don't worry, I get your point. It should probably be more towards "takes place after the defeat of Majin Buu, potentially putting it in either the 10 year gap towards the 28th World Tournament, or afterwards." SP Gohan (talk) 05:30, April 30, 2015 (UTC)

Okay, I understand. Yah, I'm having a hard time with the wording. I think your suggestion is better than how I wrote it. -- 10X.Ka^.me_.ha^.me_.ha^.._.^..talk_.^..._.contrib. 17:10, April 30, 2015 (UTC)

You can't start a series in the middle of a series. So why does the wiki say 10 before the torunament or afterwards? And the Majin Buu saga is different in Japan than here in the U.S. It's gonna be afterwards Meshack (talk) 04:14, May 22, 2015 (UTC)

You can start a series in the middle of a series, and it's most likely that will be what happens. The official statement says it's the aftermath of Buu, which probably means within 10 years. However, "probably" isn't good enough to state as a fact in the article, so we say it happens in the gap before that tournament (the finale of DBZ) or sometime afterward. -- 10X.Ka^.me_.ha^.me_.ha^.._.^..talk_.^..._.contrib. 18:40, May 24, 2015 (UTC)

Release date[]

It has been said numerous times that DBS will be released on July 5th, the Sunday after Dragon Ball Z Kai's ending. Can we change it or does it have to be official?

Needs to have a source. Sandubadear 00:59, May 5, 2015 (UTC)

Dragon Ball Insider Meshack (talk) 03:32, May 5, 2015 (UTC)

Correct me if I wrong, I read from other source that DB Kai has 69 episodes, which should not finish by 28 June with only 61 episodes. http://www.animenewsnetwork.com/news/2014-02-17/new-dragon-ball-kai-anime-to-premiere-on-april-6

http://www.animenewsnetwork.com/news/2014-04-17/dragon-ball-z-kai/the-final-chapters-listed-at-69-episodes

We already have confirmation of the episode count from DVD listings; which means kai will end on 28 June with 61 episodes. [1]

It does not necesarily follow that Super will start the week after; there could be a week's break for all we know, but it is a good estimate. --Cadellin (talk) 15:13, May 26, 2015 (UTC)

Goku Jr. and Vegeta Jr.[]

Does Akira Toriyama will have characters from the Dragon Ball Super to be Goku Jr. and Vegeta Jr. at Age 889. --Alexribeiro.soares.7 (talk) 13:21, June 14, 2015 (UTC)

I don't think we know yet. -- 10X.Ka^.me_.ha^.me_.ha^.._.^..talk_.^..._.contrib. 03:00, June 15, 2015 (UTC)

I have a question about the two sagas listed so far in Dragon Ball Super. There listed as Battle of Gods & Ressurection F and it says it depectis the events around the movies. So my question is the sagas going to be about what the Z fighters did before and after the movies happens and then do something with the other God of Destruction?

Is the series suppose to be formmated for example like 15 episodes of Battle of Gods Saga and then the movie happens then 15 episodes that leads to Ressurection F then whtaever they have planned post-Ressurection f?

I'm just asking for some clarifaction. Saoakden (talk) 23:10, July 5, 2015 (UTC)saoakden.

It's still unclear exactly what will come. It appears to be a remake of the movies in anime form. -- 10X.Ka^.me_.ha^.me_.ha^.._.^..talk_.^..._.contrib. 23:18, July 5, 2015 (UTC)

Super Dragon Balls[]

Anyone feel like the new Black Star Super Dragon Balls are a lazy plot element? -- 10X.Ka^.me_.ha^.me_.ha^.._.^..talk_.^..._.contrib. 20:56, July 6, 2015 (UTC)

Dear 10x, there is already far more lazy plot elements that can come to mind. — A ^{(t • c)} 21:18, July 6, 2015 (UTC)

The show is called Dragon Ball. I wouldn't call it lazy though Meshack (talk) 00:09, July 7, 2015 (UTC)

 its the canon versionLegoviking285 (talk) 07:31, July 7, 2015 (UTC)

I agree. I already loathe the Black Star Dragon Balls, we don't need more...  Dinky Talk 08:26, July 7, 2015 (UTC)

Bulma and Vegeta[]

Do you think akira will finally reveal how these two got together in a flash back?

I don't care how they got together in the first place; it would be awkward to see the moments that led them to having an affair and having Trunks. I don't think akira is interested in that topic. But I want to see whether or not Bra will appear in Dragon Ball Super.(talk)

no Meshack (talk) 00:41, July 8, 2015 (UTC)

It wasn't really an affair. They were both single. -- 10X.Ka^.me_.ha^.me_.ha^.._.^..talk_.^..._.contrib. 05:32, July 9, 2015 (UTC)

Sagas[]

where's the proof that these are the actual names of the sagas. Nikon23 13:48, July 9, 2015 (UTC)

Akira Toriyama said it in an interview recently. Sandubadear 17:16, July 9, 2015 (UTC)

The little number after the facts are stated on the article are called "reference tags". Click these, and you'll be taken to a highlighted entry in the reference section at the bottom of the article. These quotes or links will take you to the source of the information tagged in the article. -- 10X.Ka^.me_.ha^.me_.ha^.._.^..talk_.^..._.contrib. 01:36, July 11, 2015 (UTC)

SonGoku-God[]

dragon ball super retcons yo son goku and his friends return, battle of godsa and fukkatsu no f movies. —This unsigned comment was made by SonGoku-God (talk • contribs) Please sign your posts with ~~~~ next time!

The term retcon is usually used when a certain detail is contradicted or replaced. Since the anime is completely redoing everything very opening, "remake" seems more fitting. This is bizarre to be happening within mere months of the original media release. -- 10X.Ka^.me_.ha^.me_.ha^.._.^..talk_.^..._.contrib. 01:45, July 14, 2015 (UTC)

Champa arc[]

V-Jump announced that in the manga, there's a Champa arc and it is going ahead of the anime. Do we add this or no? Meshack (talk) 20:24, October 5, 2015 (UTC)

Sure. -- 10X.Ka^.me_.ha^.me_.ha^.._.^..talk_.^..._.contrib. 02:25, October 7, 2015 (UTC)

What If Dragon Ball Super began after Uub's training with Goku?[]

It began in 6 months before Uub was born but what about if Uub's training with Goku was finished? I'm curious what happen if Dragon Ball Super began after Uub's training with Goku. Ronwellnagales28 (talk) 19:49, January 24, 2016 (UTC)

Is this a theoretical question? They haven't met yet in Super. -- 10X.Ka^.me_.ha^.me_.ha^.._.^..talk_.^..._.contrib. 00:48, January 26, 2016 (UTC)

Yes, That is my theoretical question. Ronwellnagales28 (talk) 01:46, January 26, 2016 (UTC)

Maybe best to make a forum or blog. The article talk pages are really more for formatting issues. -- 10X.Ka^.me_.ha^.me_.ha^.._.^..talk_.^..._.contrib. 01:56, January 26, 2016 (UTC)

okay. Ronwellnagales28 (talk) 06:20, January 26, 2016 (UTC)

Evil Goku[]

So is the confirmed for Evil Goku known as Goku Black now appeared in Dragon Ball Super. http://www.saiyanisland.com/2016/05/dragon-ball-super-black-goku-future-trunks-confirmed BabyKratosxZeus (talk) 18:32, May 9, 2016 (UTC)

Weren't Turles, Raditz, and Vegeta enough? Do they need another evil Goku? -- 10X.Ka^.me_.ha^.me_.ha^.._.^..talk_.^..._.contrib. 23:14, May 10, 2016 (UTC)

DVD / Blu-Ray Release Dates in Region 1[]

We all know DBZ Kai: The Final Chapters Part One (english dub episodes 99-121) is going to be released in Region 1/4 A/B on DVD and Blu-Ray on April 25, 2017, why haven't we seen word of a Dragon Ball Super Blu-Ray / DVD release with the first 27 episodes, I wonder if they'll release anything this year, hopefully we'll see some announcement of a set of the first 3 story arcs (at least, the most we got on the DBZ sets were 34 episodes) and 46 episodes on a DVD (or for better quality and profit, Blu-Ray) set this year or month, the show seems to be progressing as tonight I saw the airing of Episode 6 on Toonami, good, yet waiting for a fight :3

DBZ Kai TFC P1: https://www.amazon.com/Dragon-Ball-Kai-Chapters-Blu-ray/dp/B01N35GYFA

                      -- TheJasbre202 (talk) 05:42, February 12, 2017 (UTC)

Crispin Freeman in Funimation dub?[]

I was checking out the voice cast and I noticed Crispin Freeman was listed as the Great Priest in the Funimation dub? Is this true?! MrWii000 (talk) 22:58, August 12, 2017 (UTC)

Anime conclusion/break[]

Recently translted by Herms: https://twitter.com/Herms98/status/954086203044675584

Seems production of Super is halting. Could be permanently, but not known for sure yet. Worth noting either way QHRvRICdalurIA (talk) 12:08, January 19, 2018 (UTC)

Hiatus for the production of the movie. ConTraZ VII (talk) 23:46, January 19, 2018 (UTC)

288 to 289[]

Been while since I watched DBZ, was there a pretty large time-skip between those eps that had space for 131 super eps?

If someone is thinking "I'll rewatch all of DB" should they then be watching all of Super prior to 289 now? Tycio (talk) 21:05, 30 December 2021 (UTC)